beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul Administrative Court 2012Guhap32840 (2013.07)
Case Number of the previous trial
2012west 1620 ( July 11, 2012)
Title
It is illegal to seek a lawsuit seeking a non-existent disposition and there is no interest in the lawsuit
Summary
When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity, and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition shall be illegal as there is no interest in the lawsuit.
Cases
2013Nu26387 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax
Plaintiff and appellant
IsaA
Defendant, Appellant
Head of the Do Tax Office
Judgment of the first instance court
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2012Guhap32840 decided August 7, 2013
Conclusion of Pleadings
May 14, 2014
Imposition of Judgment
June 11, 2014
Text
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.
Purport of claim and appeal
1. Purport of claim
The imposition of gift tax on the Plaintiff on January 4, 2012 by the Defendant is revoked.
2. Purport of appeal
The part of the judgment of the first instance court against the plaintiff shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke the disposition of imposition of OOO (including additional tax) of gift tax imposed on the plaintiff on January 4, 2012.
Reasons
1. Determination on the legitimacy of a lawsuit
When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity, and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Du18202, Dec. 13, 2012).
According to the evidence Nos. 18 through 20 (including additional numbers), it is recognized that the Defendant’s revocation of the instant disposition ex officio around September 2, 2013 upon the first instance court’s ruling (this is the case’s imposition of gift tax in accordance with the purport of the first instance judgment, and there was no procedure to change a lawsuit under Article 22 of the Administrative Litigation Act in relation thereto).
Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is seeking revocation of a non-existent disposition, and became illegal as there is no benefit of lawsuit.
2. Conclusion
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the case shall be dismissed. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act.