Busan District Court 2013Guhap21190 ( August 28, 2014)

Among the lawsuits, the disposition of imposition shall be revoked ex officio, and there is no subject matter of lawsuit.

The disposition authority in the appellate court shall revoke ex officio the disposition of imposition, which became a dispute, and reject the lawsuit as it falls under an unlawful lawsuit because there is no object of the lawsuit.

Article 88 (Definition of Transfer) of Income Tax Act

2014Nu22342 Revocation of disposition of revocation of capital gains tax imposition.

GuAA

00. Head of tax office

Busan District Court Decision 2013Guhap21190 Decided August 28, 2014

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Claim: The principal tax on the capital gains tax for which the defendant transferred to the plaintiff on October 0, 2012 for the year 2012.

The imposition of a penalty surcharge of KRW 00,000,000 and KRW 0,000,000 shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal: Revocation of the judgment of the first instance. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Details of the disposition;

The court's explanation on this part is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the reasoning of the judgment is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

If an administrative disposition is revoked, no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Du16879, Apr. 29, 2010). However, according to each description of evidence Nos. 7 and 8, the Defendant’s revocation of the instant disposition on May 14, 2015 is recognized as having been ex officio. As such, the instant disposition has already become extinct and the Plaintiff has no benefit of lawsuit seeking its revocation, and thus, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it is unlawful because there is no interest in lawsuit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair, so the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed, and the total cost of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant under Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It