Seoul Administrative Court 2012Guhap16725 ( November 30, 2012)

Specifically, it cannot be determined that there is no fact that the company did not participate in the management of the company is an oligopolistic shareholder.

The plaintiff's assertion that her husband was registered as a shareholder in the form of a delinquent corporation and did not have been involved in the management of the company cannot be found in the fact that her husband did not have been involved in the management of the company. Thus, the plaintiff should be subject to secondary tax liability for the delinquent corporation according to shares owned by her shares.

2013Nu2213. Revocation of imposition of value-added tax, etc.

KimA

Head of Guro Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2012Guhap16725 decided November 30, 2012

September 10, 2013

October 11, 2013

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

On June 1, 2011, the Defendant: (a) designated the Plaintiff as the secondary taxpayer for BB Public Drugs Co., Ltd. on June 1, 201; and (b) revoked the disposition of OOO of the value-added tax for the first time in 200

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's explanation on this case is the same as the statement of the reasons for the decision of the court of first instance. Thus, the court's explanation is based on Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the part of the lawsuit in this case seeking the revocation of the disposition of imposition of additional OOOOO, is unlawful and dismissed, and the remaining claims of the plaintiff are dismissed as it is without merit. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is just in this conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.