1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The defendant asserted on September 12, 2007 without the plaintiff's consent and registered the business of "C" under the name of the plaintiff in the Ansan Tax Office by designating the non-party D as his agent.

(hereinafter “instant place of business”). During the period in which the Defendant runs the instant place of business, value-added tax and global income tax were imposed on the Plaintiff, the nominal owner of the instant place of business, and the said tax was not paid by the Defendant.

Since the Plaintiff was not obligated to pay taxes imposed on the Plaintiff due to the lack of actual operation of the instant place of business, the actual business operator of the instant place of business is the Defendant.

2. We examine, ex officio, whether the instant lawsuit is lawful or not.

The benefit of confirmation in a lawsuit for confirmation is recognized in cases where there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to the lawsuit for confirmation, and thereby, it is recognized as the most effective and appropriate means to determine the Plaintiff’s legal status as the confirmation judgment to eliminate such apprehension and danger when the Plaintiff’s legal status is unstable and dangerous (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da93299, Feb. 25, 2010). Even if the Plaintiff was rendered a judgment against the Defendant as stated in the purport of the claim against the Defendant, the effect of the judgment does not extend to the tax authority, the third party, and thus does not affect

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit seeking confirmation of business status against the Defendant cannot be the most effective and appropriate means to resolve disputes between the parties surrounding the status of taxpayers subject to taxation. Therefore, the instant lawsuit has no interest in confirmation.

If the actual business operator of the instant business is the Defendant, the Plaintiff could no longer dispute on the grounds that the said tax disposition was unlawful by filing an administrative litigation, or that it was against the intent of the filing period.