The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 107(2)5 of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12153, Jan. 1, 2014) provides that a truster, who is not a trustee, shall be liable to pay property tax for any trust property registered under the name of the trustee pursuant to the Trust Act. Article 22(1) of the Trust Act allows compulsory execution, auction, preservative disposition, or disposition on default of national taxes, etc. for any trust property only when it is based on a right arising before the trust or a right arising from the performance of trust affairs.

However, in a case where a trust relationship under the Trust Act is established between the parties by transferring the ownership of the real estate to the trustee, the trust property cannot be deemed as the truster’s property any more than after the trust is fully transferred to the trustee, and the trust property imposed upon the truster as a taxpayer after the trust cannot be deemed as falling under the “right arising from the cause before the trust” under Article 22(1) of the Trust Act, and such property tax is not included in the “right arising from the process of trust affairs” under the same provision, and thus, it cannot be seized for the trust property under the title of the trustee or received a dividend in the auction procedure of the court of execution for the trust property.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da17424, Oct. 15, 1996; Supreme Court Decision 2010Da67593, Jul. 12, 2012). Meanwhile, a taxation claim is a private right recognized by the National Tax Collection Act as a priority right and a right to self-performance, etc. under the National Tax Collection Act, and its nature differs from that of private law, and its establishment and exercise are possible only by Acts and subordinate statutes in order to protect citizens from unfair tax collection and to ensure fairness in tax burden.