(a) The degree of indication of a person liable for duty payment in tax payment notice to have the effect as a lawful duty payment notice;

B. Whether a tax payment notice based on a tax payment notice stating the same name but different taxpayer's number and address is lawful (negative), and whether the validity of an unlawful tax payment notice is supplemented where the tax authority verified that the taxpayer is a taxpayer after the fact (negative)

(a) The determination of a taxpayer on a tax payment notice must be objectively determined in accordance with the formal description of the tax payment notice, but a service by the tax payment notice shall not have its validity as a legitimate tax payment notice if the taxpayer’s indication is not clearly identified;

B. If a tax payment notice includes a taxpayer's name but the taxpayer's number and address were served to a taxpayer by stating that the taxpayer's name was an unrelated person with the taxpayer, such notice shall be deemed a case where the taxpayer's identity cannot be identified by his/her own statement of tax payment notice. As long as it cannot be deemed that a legitimate tax payment notice existed, it shall not be deemed that a legitimate tax payment notice was issued. Thus, even if the tax authority later confirmed the taxpayer as a taxpayer on the tax payment notice and issued

Article 9 of the National Tax Collection Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorneys Park Jae-soo and 1 other, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff

Head of Three Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 92Gu7759 delivered on July 21, 1992

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

In making a tax disposition by a tax payment notice, the taxpayer's decision should be objectively determined in accordance with the formal description of the tax payment notice, and if the taxpayer's indication on the tax payment notice is not clear enough to identify the taxpayer's identity, the service by the tax payment notice shall not have the validity as a legitimate tax payment notice.

As determined by the court below in this case, if the defendant entered the plaintiff's name with regard to the indication of the taxpayer on the tax payment notice, but the taxpayer's number (resident registration number) and address were stated in the non-party with no relation to the plaintiff and served it on the plaintiff, it shall not be deemed that there was a legitimate tax payment notice, and as long as it cannot be deemed that there was a legitimate tax payment notice, it shall not be deemed that there was a legitimate tax payment notice, and as long as the defendant confirmed that the taxpayer on the tax payment notice was the plaintiff and issued the tax payment notice to the plaintiff, the validity of the tax payment notice shall not be corrected. The judgment below is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles or incomplete deliberation as pointed out by the plaintiff.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)