1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part of the claim seeking confirmation of invalidity of the disposition imposing additional dues is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims.

1. On December 13, 2007, the head of the Incheon District Tax Office having jurisdiction over the disposition shall determine the decision of correction of global income tax for the plaintiff on December 13, 2007 (B where the plaintiff is the representative director (hereinafter "B").

(2) The Defendant issued an additional notice of KRW 207,111,934 of the global income tax on the Plaintiff via the return of the value-added tax (hereinafter “instant disposition”). Accordingly, on February 5, 2008, the Defendant issued an additional notice of KRW 20,711,194 of the resident tax to be imposed on the Plaintiff via the determination of the resident tax to be imposed on the Plaintiff in 2003 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(On the other hand, the defendant, on November 30, 2009, dealt with the loss as a reason for the shortage of delinquent taxes after the completion of the disposition on default on the land owned by the plaintiff. (On the other hand, the defendant, on November 30, 2009, the resident tax and its additional dues 6,08,90 won was disposed of as a reason for the shortage of delinquent taxes.)

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. Whether the part concerning the claim for confirmation of invalidity of the disposition imposing additional dues in the instant lawsuit is legitimate: The additional dues determined by Article 27 of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9924, Jan. 1, 2010) are naturally generated pursuant to the provisions of the Act without the procedure for confirmation of the tax office, unless the local tax is paid by the deadline for payment. Thus, the notice of additional dues cannot be deemed a disposition subject to appeal

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da15482, Jun. 10, 2005). Therefore, this part of a lawsuit is unlawful as it is against non-existent disposition.

B. (1) Since the judgment on the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits of the instant case was completed 5 years after the Defendant’s summary of the claim, the extinctive prescription was completed after the Defendant’s non-exercise of the right to collect, there is no benefit to seek confirmation on the invalidity

(2) The administrative litigation is to relieve the infringement of citizens’ rights or interests by cancelling or changing the illegal disposition, etc. of an administrative agency, or by confirming whether the administrative agency has validity or existence thereof.