Whether a secondary taxpayer designation disposition is an administrative disposition that is subject to appeal litigation.

The secondary tax liability pursuant to Article 39 of the Framework Act on National Taxes is abstractly established by the occurrence of a fact that meets the requirements such as the delinquency of the principal taxpayer and specifically decided by the notice of payment. Since the secondary tax liability is not determined by the designation of the secondary taxpayer, the designation of the secondary taxpayer does not yet become final and conclusive, the designation of the secondary taxpayer shall not be deemed

Article 39 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act / [General]

Supreme Court Decision 83Nu95 Decided May 10, 1983 (Gong1983,978) 84Nu132 Decided February 8, 1985 (Gong1985,43)

Plaintiff 1 and 4 others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellee

The Head of the Maternization Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 94Gu28095 delivered on April 14, 1995

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The secondary liability for tax payment under Article 39 of the Framework Act on National Taxes is abstractly established by the occurrence of a fact that meets the requirements, such as the delinquency of the principal taxpayer, and specifically decided by the notice of payment. Since the secondary liability for tax payment is not determined by itself, such designation disposition does not yet become final and conclusive, such designation disposition cannot be deemed an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation (see Supreme Court Decision 83Nu95, May 10, 1983; Supreme Court Decision 84Nu132, Feb. 8, 1985; Supreme Court Decision 84Nu132, Feb. 8, 1985). The judgment of the court below which dismissed the lawsuit of this case seeking revocation of the notice of designation of the secondary liability for tax payment without a payment notice, is justifiable, and there is no error

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

Justices Park Jong-chul (Presiding Justice)