Whether the statutory due date of additional dues shall be deemed the day following the due date for payment

The statutory due date of additional dues shall be deemed the day following the due date of payment (to refer to the Supreme Court precedents).

Article 35 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

1. Of the distribution schedule prepared by the above court on July 21, 2006 with respect to the auction case of real estate rent as set forth in ○○ District Court △△△△△△△△, 15,000,000 won for the amount of distribution to Defendant Park Park Park, 4,863,195 won, 1,508,650 won for the amount of distribution to Defendant Park Park, 61,636,945 won for the Plaintiff, and the amount of distribution to the Plaintiff shall be corrected to 72,00,000 won, respectively.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 27, 2003, the Plaintiff extended 60,000,000 won to the △△△△△△△△△, the Plaintiff completed the registration of creation of a mortgage with respect to ○○○○○○-dong, ○○○○-dong, ○○○○ apartment, ○○○○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, ○○, and ○○, ○○, 00 won (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

B. Upon the Plaintiff’s request, in ○○ District Court’s △△ Branch’s △△△ Branch’s 2005ta around 16906 regarding the apartment of this case (the registration of the commencement of auction was made on August 23, 2005), the above court prepared a distribution schedule with the Defendant Republic of Korea (the head of the competent tax office in charge of △△△△△), in the first order among the amount to be actually distributed after deducting the execution cost from the sale price, etc. on July 21, 2006, the date of distribution, 94,529,525 won, which is the date of distribution, as a small lessee of this case, in the first order among the amount to be distributed to 16,00,000 won, and the amount to be distributed to △△,5,000,000 won, and the amount to be KRW 157,934,650, and the amount to be distributed to △△ branch’s △△ branch.

C. The Plaintiff appeared on the above date of distribution, and stated an objection against the entire amount of distribution to Defendant Park Jong on the distribution schedule, and 226,250 won out of the amount of distribution to Defendant Park Jong-chul 1,734,650 won, and filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the instant distribution on July 27, 2006, within the statutory period.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence No. 1-1, 2, and Evidence No. 5-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. Claim against Defendant Park XX

The plaintiff asserts that it is improper to distribute 15,000,000 won to the above defendant as the most lessee of defendant Park XX.

According to the evidence No. 6, No. 1-6, No. 2-3, and No. 6, each of the documents No. 1-6, No. 2-3, and No. 6, Defendant Park Jong-gu prepared a lease agreement on May 6, 2004 with the content that Defendant Park Jong-gu set one of the apartment units of this case from the largest △△△△△△△△△ for lease from May 6, 2004 to the lease period of 15,00,000, and for 206, May 6, 2004, and obtained the fixed date after completing the move-in report on the apartment unit of this case on April 2, 2005.

However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking account of the aforementioned evidence and evidence No. 2-3 and No. 5-1 through No. 4 of the Seoul Credit Guarantee Foundation’s overall purport of the pleadings, namely, at the time when the moving-in report and the fixed date of the resident registration of the Defendant Park Jong-gu were granted one year from the date when the above lease contract was made, and at the time when August 23, 2005, the entry registration of the start-up decision of this case was made, and at the time when the Plaintiff was made for four months from August 23, 2005, the demand notice for the performance of the obligation of △△△△ was made from the Plaintiff, and at the time when the above lease was made with the maximum △△△△△△△△, the establishment registration of the mortgage of the maximum debt amount of 30,600,000 won, the establishment registration of the maximum debt amount of △△△△△△△△△△△△△ was made as the employee of the Plaintiff Park.

B. Claim against Defendant Republic of Korea

The plaintiff asserts that it is unreasonable for the auction court to preferentially distribute the amount to the defendant, even though it is lower than the claim secured by the plaintiff's right to collateral security, which is the additional amount of KRW 26,250, which is the additional amount of KRW 1,734,650 paid to the defendant.

The order of priority between the claims secured by a tax and a mortgage shall be determined based on the statutory due date and the registration date for the establishment of a tax, and there is no separate provision under Article 35(1)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes with respect to the statutory due date, but Article 2 subparag. 5 of the same Act and Article 21 of the National Tax Collection Act provide that if the national tax is not paid by the due date, additional dues shall be collected in addition to the notified tax amount under the same Act. As such, additional dues shall not be paid by the due date notified in the notice of payment of the principal tax in accordance with Article 9 of the same Act, and shall naturally be determined by the same provision without a separate final procedure for the tax authority's additional dues. Accordingly, the statutory due date for additional dues shall be deemed the time when the tax liability for additional dues becomes final and conclusive by analogy applying the provisions of Article 35(1)3(c) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, i.e., the due date notified in the notice of payment (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da74374, Mar.

On November 27, 2003, the registration of creation of a new mortgage in the Plaintiff’s name was completed on November 27, 2003. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement of No. 4, 1,734,650, which was distributed to the Defendant, the statutory due date is January 25, 2003, and the due date is KRW 1,508,40 and additional 226,250, which is October 31, 2004. Thus, the statutory due date of additional claim for value-added tax is the time when the liability to pay additional tax becomes final and conclusive, that is, when the payment obligation becomes final and conclusive on October 31, 2004, which is the time limit notified in the notice of payment, and thus, the dividends of the Plaintiff’s above additional claim is lower than the Plaintiff’s secured claims, and this portion of the additional claim is unjust.

5. Conclusion

Therefore, from among the distribution schedule of this case, 226,250 won, which is the additional amount of 1,734,650 won for the defendant's Republic of Korea, shall be deleted to 1,508,400 won, and 10,136,805 won out of the amount of distribution for the defendant's gambling, shall be determined to 4,863,195 won, and the above 10,363,05 won (226,250 won + 10,136,805 won) shall be corrected to 61,636,945 won for the plaintiff's dividends to the plaintiff in addition to the amount of distribution for the plaintiff. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants against the defendants shall be accepted for all reasons, and it is so decided as per Disposition.