logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017. 11. 29. 선고 2017두59970 판결
(심리불속행) 부작위위법확인의 소는 부작위가 위법하다는 확인을 구할 법률상의 이익이 있는 자만이 제기 할 수 있음[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Daejeon High Court-2017-Nu-11266 ( August 17, 2017)

Title

(In the case of a suit for confirmation of illegality of an omission), only a person with a legal interest to seek confirmation that the omission is illegal may file a suit.

Summary

(Summary of the Supreme Court) If the attachment is no longer needed under the National Tax Collection Act, the tax authority does not have any obligation to entrust the registration of cancellation to the relevant government agency.

Related statutes

Article 53 of the National Tax Collection Act

Cases

2017du5970 The revocation of the disposition to impose capital gains tax and the cancellation of the cancellation thereof.

Plaintiff-Appellant

OO

Defendant-Appellee

O Head of tax office

Judgment of the lower court

Daejeon High Court 2017Nu11266 ( August 17, 2017)

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Although examining the judgment of the court below in light of the records of this case, the argument on the grounds of appeal is dismissed.

It is recognized that there is no reason to constitute Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Vehicles.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed in accordance with Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided by the assent of all participating Justices.

It is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

arrow