(a) Method of serving a tax payment notice on a family subject to summing up assets;

B. In a case where income tax has been imposed on the principal income earner by a single tax payment notice, whether the family members subject to aggregate assets can seek the revocation of taxation without a separate tax payment notice (affirmative)

A. In full view of the provisions of Article 103 of the Income Tax Act, Article 183(4) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Article 2(3) of the same Act, and Article 9(1) of the National Tax Collection Act, when notice of the tax base and tax amount determined by aggregating property income of the family subject to the sum of property income of the principal income earner into the global income of the principal income earner, the tax payment notice shall be based on one tax payment notice, and the tax payment notice shall include not only the content of property income of each family subject to the sum of assets but also the tax amount to be paid jointly by the family subject

B. When the family to collect the tax on the property income from the family to be added to assets, it is required to notify the subject family of the tax payment in accordance with the tax payment notice set forth in Paragraph A above. However, where the income tax has been imposed on the principal income subject to the said tax payment notice, the subject family may file a complaint for objection within the scope of its joint and several tax payment liability even if no separate tax payment notice has been given.

Article 2(3) A of the Income Tax Act; Articles 80 and 103 of the Income Tax Act; Article 183(4) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act; Article 9(1)2 of the National Tax Collection Act; Article 12 of the Administrative Litigation Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 86Nu136 delivered on May 26, 1987 (Gong1987, 1298)

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1

The director of the tax office.

Seoul High Court Decision 91Gu27046 delivered on June 25, 1992

The part of the lower judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s lawsuit is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the plaintiff's spouse, as the plaintiff's spouse, obtained real estate income from the lease to the non-party 1 and the non-party 2, the main income earner under Article 80 of the Income Tax Act, imposed global income tax and its defense tax on the non-party 2, including the plaintiff's global income of the non-party 2, who is the principal income earner under Article 80 of the Income Tax Act, and that the above disposition was unlawful on the ground that the above disposition was conducted on the ground that the above income from the lease of the above gifted Institute constitutes other income, on its own initiative, and in light of the purport of Article 80 (1) and (3) of the same Act, the principal income earner is liable to pay taxes on the real estate income of the non-party 2, which is added to the global income of the principal income earner. Thus, the principal income earner is qualified to seek revocation of the tax assessment, and even if other family members are not the main income earner, the plaintiff's standing to sue is dismissed.

2. However, with respect to property income subject to cumulative taxation under Article 2(3) of the Income Tax Act, it is clear that the principal income earner and the family members subject to cumulative taxation under Article 80 of the same Act have the liability to pay taxes jointly and severally. Therefore, the judgment of the court below that only the principal income earner is liable to pay taxes is unlawful.

3. Meanwhile, Article 103 of the same Act provides that when the principal income earner and other family members subject to aggregate of assets file a final return on the tax base, the principal income earner shall file a return jointly with his family members subject to aggregate of assets. According to Article 183(4) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, when the head of a tax office notifies the tax base and tax amount determined by adding property income for assets of the principal income earner, other than the principal income earner, to the global income of the principal income earner, he shall be subject to one tax payment notice, and the contents of property income for each family subject to aggregate of assets shall be additionally stated. In full view of the above provisions and Article 2(3) of the same Act and Article 9(1) of the National Tax Collection Act, a single tax payment notice shall include not only the contents of property income for each family subject to aggregate of assets, but also the amount of tax to be paid jointly with the principal income earner (see Supreme Court Decision 86Nu136, May 26, 1987).

In addition, when the above tax is to be collected from the family subject to the aggregate taxation of assets, the family subject to the above tax payment notice should be notified of the tax payment. However, if the income tax has been imposed on the principal income subject to the above tax payment notice, the family subject to the above tax payment notice may file a petition for objection within the scope of his joint and several tax liability, even if there is no separate notice of tax payment.

4. Thus, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to joint and several tax liability of the family members in the aggregate of assets or the standing to be a party, and the scope of the issue is justified.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed and remanded, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Final Young-young (Presiding Justice)