Whether each of the dispositions of this case is null and void after the declaration of bankruptcy.

Each of the dispositions of this case was conducted prior to the declaration of bankruptcy with respect to the debtor company, and each of the dispositions of this case cannot be deemed null and void on the ground that each of the dispositions of this case was merely a minor mistake in its procedural process, even though the debtor company did not issue a certified copy of the attachment report to the debtor company at the time of each disposition of

Article 24 of the National Tax Collection Act

Suwon District Court 2016Guhap62987 Nullification of Attachment Disposition

AA

00. Head of tax office

on 19, 2016

on January 13, 2015

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

On October 14, 2013, 14. 14. 14. 2013. O branch of the Cheong-gu District Court (O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the Republic of Korea of the O branch of the money branch of the AA branch of the 2013 branch of the O branch of the 2013 branch of the 838 branch of the O branch of the O branch of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as the "debtor company") attached an amount up to the amount of national taxes deposited by the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the O branch of the Republic of Korea.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant seized each of the following listed items (hereinafter “each of the instant claims”) that the obligor Company had against the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “each of the instant pressures and seriess disposition”) upon the obligor Company’s default of national taxes of KRW 45,541,168,840, including corporate tax, value-added tax, and wage and salary income tax. B. Bankruptcy was declared against the obligor Company on November 7, 2013, and the Plaintiff was appointed as the trustee in bankruptcy. The Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the grounds for recognition, and each of the entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 8, and Eul’s evidence No. 2 (including the evidence attached with serial numbers), the entire purport of the pleadings, and the entire purport of the pleadings.

2. Determination as to whether each of the instant attachment dispositions is invalid

A. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

Article 349(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Rehabilitation Act")

(1) When a disposition for arrears is taken against any property belonging to the bankrupt estate before bankruptcy is declared.

It is possible to continue the disposition for arrears, but after the bankruptcy is declared pursuant to paragraph (2) of the same Article, the property is substituted by the property.

In case of a disposition for arrears, it is not possible to take a disposition for arrears, and in case of a disposition for arrears, it shall be

It is limited to cases where seizure takes effect. However, prior to November 7, 2013, the date of adjudication of bankruptcy, the defendant

not deliver to the debtor company the attachment report prepared to seize each claim of this case.

Since there is no notification of seizure to the debtor company, each of the dispositions of this case is declared bankrupt.

each of the dispositions of this case shall not be deemed to have been conducted before the

Therefore, it shall be deemed null and void under Article 349(2) of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act.

Even if it is not so, the defendant of this case to the debtor company pursuant to Articles 24 and 41 of the National Tax Collection Act.

In spite of having been notified of the seizure of each claim, the debtor company did not comply with it.

Since a certified copy of attachment report was not delivered, each of the dispositions of this case shall be in accordance with the procedure of disposition on default.

Since there is a significant and apparent defect in violation, it is null and void.

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Determination

1) Whether each of the instant dispositions was null and void since the declaration of bankruptcy

Article 42 of the National Tax Collection Act provides that a notice of attachment to a third party obligor shall be served on the attachment of claims.

is defined that it shall take place at the time of such occurrence.

In light of the above facts, as seen in the above facts, the defendant's seizure of each of the above cases.

When rendering a disposition, notice of seizure was given to the Republic of Korea, the garnishee, and such notice was given on October 2013.

14. From the 18th of the same month to the Republic of Korea, each of the dispositions of seizure of this case reached the Republic of Korea.

Each effect shall take effect on the arrival date of the notice of attachment, which is declared bankrupt for the debtor company;

It is apparent that it was before November 7, 2013. Therefore, each of the dispositions of this case is a debtor.

was conducted prior to the declaration of bankruptcy with respect to the corporation, even if

Notice of attachment or issuance of a certified copy of attachment report shall be made prior to the declaration of bankruptcy in the debtor company.

Even if not, such conclusion does not affect the above conclusion.

Therefore, each of the instant dispositions was conducted prior to the declaration of bankruptcy against the debtor company.

(1) Notwithstanding the declaration of bankruptcy of the debtor company under Article 349(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act, the

The plaintiff's assertion against the validity and continuation of the disposition is without merit.

2) Whether each of the dispositions of this case against the disposition of seizure in arrears is null and void as a matter of course

A tax official who attaches the defaulted taxpayer's property pursuant to Article 29 (1) of the National Tax Collection Act.

In preparing a attachment report and attaching claims, etc., a certified copy of the attachment report shall be delivered to the delinquent taxpayer.

under section 41(1) and (3) of the same Act, and the director of the tax office shall seize the claims, if any.

It shall be notified to the garnishee and the delinquent taxpayer shall be notified of the attachment of the claim.

However, a tax official's seizure of bonds as a disposition on default and a third party debtor;

Notice of prohibition on the performance of obligations to the payer is the essential content of the seizure of claims.

in the absence of such claim, the attachment order shall not be effective, or the delinquent taxpayer shall not have the attachment order.

Whether a certified copy has been issued, or whether a notice of attachment was given to a delinquent taxpayer, etc.

for the minor procedural error that does not constitute an essential element of the

No principal cannot be deemed null and void (Supreme Court Decision 88Meu19033 Decided November 14, 1989; Supreme Court Decision 88Meu19033 Decided November 14, 198

See Supreme Court Decision 3282 delivered on August 25, 1995, etc.

In light of the above legal principles, each of the instant seizures by the Defendant, as alleged by the Plaintiff.

In making a disposition, a copy of attachment report is not issued to the debtor company, or a notice of attachment is given.

Even if not, each attachment disposition of this case is null and void merely due to minor errors in such procedures.

In addition, each of the instant dispositions is invalid due to a serious and apparent violation of the procedures.

There is no evidence to regard it as such.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

section 1.