Dismissal following the lapse of the period for filing an appeal;

In order to institute an administrative litigation, a prior trial procedure shall be conducted and a decision to dismiss shall be made within 90 days after receipt of a tax notice, but more than 90 days.

Article 68 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Daejeon District Court-2017-Gu Partnership-1683

○ ○

○○ Head of tax office

October 19, 2018

November 7, 2018

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of national tax of KRW 1,562,00,000 against the Plaintiff on December 1, 2016 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff, a foreign-invested corporation that manufactures aircraft parts, moved its place of business from Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to Daejeon AAB Dong on September 201, and moved its place of business to Daejeon PAB Dong on October 1, 2014.

B. Around September 2016, the Defendant conducted a general consolidated investigation with the Plaintiff, and determined that the Plaintiff was exempted from corporate tax even if it did not satisfy the requirements of Article 63-2 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (where a corporation’s factory and head office is relocated to outside the Seoul Metropolitan area, corporate tax reduction, etc.), and that the Plaintiff was given the electronic notice on December 1, 2016 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

C. On December 2, 2016, the Defendant stored a tax payment notice following the instant disposition in the national tax information and communications network and served the Plaintiff’s e-mail (the Plaintiff applied for electronic notification on June 30, 2003).

D. On March 3, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Tax Tribunal for the revocation of the instant disposition, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s request on September 5, 2017 on the grounds that the request period under Article 68 of the Framework Act on National Taxes has expired.

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. The defendant's main defense

As the Plaintiff did not file a request for examination or appeal within 90 days from the date of electronic delivery of the instant disposition, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it did not meet the requirements for administrative appeal transfer.

(b) Related statutes;

Article 55 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "any person whose rights or interests are infringed by either an illegal or unreasonable disposition or an absence of a necessary disposition under this Act or other tax-related Acts may file a request for examination or a request for adjudication under this Chapter to cancel or modify such disposition, or for a necessary disposition." Article 56 (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "no administrative litigation against an illegal disposition under Article 55 shall be filed without going through a request for examination or a request for adjudication under this Act and a decision thereon, notwithstanding the provisions of the main sentence of Article 18 (1), Article 18 (2) and (3) of the Administrative Litigation Act." Article 68 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "an appeal shall be filed within 90 days after the date (if a notice of disposition is received, after the date of receipt) of such disposition is known," and Article 12 of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "any document served under Article 8 of the Framework Act on National Taxes shall take effect from the time when it reaches the person designated by the electronic mail address.

C. Determination

In order to file an administrative suit seeking the cancellation of the disposition of this case, the plaintiff must first undergo the procedure for a request for examination or adjudgment under the Framework Act on National Taxes, and the above request for examination or adjudgment as a procedure for the preceding trial must be legitimate. However, according to the above acknowledged facts, even if the plaintiff perused the tax payment notice following the disposition of this case on December 19, 2016, the service notice has already been made on December 2, 2016, on which the date on which the tax payment notice stored in the national tax information and communications network was stored in the national tax information and communications network. The plaintiff filed a request with the Tax Tribunal on March 3, 2017, but was rejected on September 5, 2017 by the Tax Tribunal on the ground that the period for request for examination or adjudgment has expired. The defendant's defense pointing this out is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.