Chuncheon District Court Decision 2013Guhap421 (2014.07.01)

Early High Court Decision 2013Du618 ( October 28, 2013)

service of the notice to the address of the person who is born, is legitimate.

Even if the place of residence is to be transferred, if the address is not changed on the resident registration and the person who is served a written notice instead of the address resides and is served with it, the service of the notice is lawful.

Article 114 (Determination, Revision and Notification of Tax Base for Transfer Income and Tax Amount)

Article 8 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

(Chuncheon)Revocation of disposition of revocation of imposition of capital gains tax

AA

BB Director of the Tax Office

Chuncheon District Court Decision 2013Guhap421 Decided July 1, 2014

November 12, 2014

January 14, 2015

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On March 5, 2008, the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked. It is confirmed that there is no taxation disposition of KRW 000,000,000 (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case") imposed by the defendant on the plaintiff on March 5, 2008. Preliminaryly, the disposition of this case is invalid.

The reasoning for our court’s explanation on this case is as stated in the part of the judgment of the first instance. Accordingly, pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant did not lawfully serve the Plaintiff with the ordinary registered mail claimed as the notice of the instant disposition on March 10, 208, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this. Rather, the Plaintiff did not lawfully serve the Plaintiff with the notice of the transfer income tax of 2-1, 2, and 4-1, 4-1, 5-1, 2, 5-2, 7-1, 7-1, 8-2, 9-2, and 9-2, and 2-2, and 3-1, 10-1, 8-2, 10-2, 20-1, 20-2, 200-1, 200-2, 300-2,000.

In addition, the plaintiff asserts that the defendant did not deliver 50,000 won or more national taxes by means of a registered mail by direct delivery or delivery, in violation of the provisions on the collection of national taxes, but the above provisions merely violate the directives and do not necessarily become null and void abrupt by itself. The plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.