Seoul High Court 2011Nu27423 (Law No. 28, 2012.09)

Any plaintiff's petition filed after the period of appeal expires is unlawful.

A tax payment notice, considering the fact that the notice was served on the apartment registered on the Plaintiff’s domicile as a result of the Plaintiff’s necessity, and thus, the tax payment notice was duly served on the Plaintiff upon receiving it by the actual resident, and a petition for trial filed after the period for

2012Du24153 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

LAA

port of origin

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu27423 Decided September 28, 2012

February 28, 2013

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The court below acknowledged the facts as indicated in its reasoning based on the adopted evidence, and found the following facts. ① The plaintiff served a notice of tax payment of this case on O2, 00 O2, 00 O2, 00 O2, 000 O2, 000 (hereinafter referred to as O2, referred to as O2, 'O2, 'O200'), ② the plaintiff filed a comprehensive income tax return after becoming aware of the disposition imposing the gift tax of this case with O2, ③ the plaintiff also asked O2, who is the resident of O2, to receive the tax payment notice and deliver it to O2, and ④ the O2, as the head of YB, resided in O2, and received the tax payment notice of this case without any objection, as well as the other tax payment notice of this case was served on O200 and delivered to the plaintiff as O200,000,0000,0000 won prior to the tax payment notice of this case.

2. In light of the relevant legal principles and records, such determination by the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the delegation of duty payment notice and receipt authority.

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