(a) the Party in whose case there are tax legal relations in withholding;

B. Whether a taxation authority’s act of receiving a withholding tax is an administrative disposition (negative)

(a) In the corporate tax withholding system, tax law relations, in principle, exists between the person liable for withholding and the tax office which is the person liable for withholding, and in relation to the tax office between the person liable for withholding and the person liable for withholding, there is no tax law relationship bilaterally except that the person liable for withholding has paid the withheld corporate tax from the person liable for withholding at the tax office.

B. The obligation of a withholding agent to pay money is established on the basis of the tax liability of a withholding agent for the taxation authority under the tax law, and thus the taxation authority’s receipt of withholding tax is merely a mere office act, and such receipt does not constitute an administrative disposition as an exercise of public authority.

(b)Article 22(2)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Articles 55 and 59 of the Corporate Tax Act; Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act;

Supreme Court Decision 82Nu174 Delivered on December 13, 1983

1. The case where the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff (Attorney Choi Young-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Ulsan District Court Decision 200Na14487 delivered on September 2, 20

Daegu High Court Decision 81Gu54 delivered on March 9, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

According to the records and the judgment of the court below, the non-party petroleum company's act of collecting 23,751,71 shares of the Corporation against the plaintiff, a corporation of August 1, 1980, purchased 23,71,71 shares of the Corporation and paid the purchase price, Article 53 through 56, Article 59 of the Corporate Tax Act, and Article 122 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act, withhold 14,231,325,00 won from the plaintiff's transfer of shares and pay it to the defendant. The above act of collecting corporate tax from the plaintiff is unlawful because the tax office's act of collecting taxes against the plaintiff is not a legitimate act of collecting corporate taxes against the plaintiff and the tax office's act of collecting taxes against the plaintiff's non-party petroleum company, which is not an illegal act of collecting corporate taxes against the plaintiff's tax office's non-performance of corporate tax, and thus, it is clear that the above act of collecting corporate taxes against the plaintiff's tax office and the tax office's act's act of collecting taxes are also illegal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)