1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 30, 2012, the Plaintiff registered the main business as a film production business with the trade name “B” and changed the trade name into “C” on January 14, 2014 by adding “do retail and synthetic resin” to the relevant item.

B. On May 14, 2018, the Defendant issued a notice of disposition imposing a fine of KRW 10,000,000 on the evaded tax amount of compulsory execution pursuant to Article 15(1) of the Procedure for the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act on the grounds that the Plaintiff had his/her business operator registered in his/her name carry on his/her business with D for the purpose of evading compulsory execution from around 2013 to around 2014.

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”) / [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the lawsuit is lawful;

A. The Defendant’s disposition of this case’s objection prior to the merits is not a disposition subject to administrative litigation, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.

B. Article 55(1)1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that notification disposition under the Procedure for the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act shall not be deemed a disposition prescribed by Article 55(1) of the same Act, and thus shall not be subject to an objection, a request for examination, or a request for adjudgment. It clearly states that notification disposition under the Procedure for the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act does not become subject to administrative litigation.

(2) As to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the disposition of this case is unlawful without having to further examine the Plaintiff’s assertion, as it does not fall under the subject of appeal litigation and is not a disposition of this case seeking the revocation of the said disposition.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, since the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case against the defendant is unlawful.