Supreme Court Decision 2010Du15902 (Law No. 13.05.09)

Since the defendant's revocation of the disposition of this case ex officio is recognized, the lawsuit of this case is illegal as there is no benefit.

Upon the judgment of remand, the defendant recognized that the disposition of this case was revoked ex officio on August 29, 2013, and since the validity of the disposition of this case became extinct, the lawsuit of this case seeking its revocation is unlawful as there is no benefit.

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

2013Nu14391 Revocation of Value-Added Tax Imposition Disposition, etc.

AA Corporation

Head of Eastern Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2009Guhap6032 Decided October 23, 2009

Seoul High Court Decision 2009Nu36431 Decided June 25, 2010

Supreme Court Decision 2010Du15902 Decided May 9, 2013

September 4, 2013

October 2, 2013

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The judgment of the court of first instance is revoked. The defendant's second-class value-added tax (including additional tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) imposed on the plaintiff on February 4, 2008 is revoked in excess of OOO(hereinafter the "disposition of this case").

1. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate

In full view of the evidence Nos. 7 and 8’s purport, upon which the judgment of remand was rendered, the Defendant’s revocation of the instant disposition ex officio around August 29, 2013.

Since the disposition of this case became null and void, the lawsuit of this case seeking its revocation is unlawful as there is no benefit.

2. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the case shall be dismissed. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act.