logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.08.16 2017누35686
종합소득세등부과처분취소
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the chief of Yangcheon Tax Office shall be revoked.

The plaintiff is the defendant.

Reasons

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the decision of the court of first instance are as stated in the corresponding part of the decision of the court of first instance (Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the dismissal or addition of a part of the decision of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this part shall be cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

Part 12 "(including additional taxes)" for the second reason shall be deleted.

The phrase “B No. 8” shall be added to the first 3-6-7 conduct (based on recognition).

2. Where an administrative disposition on the part of the claim for revocation against the amount of tax revoked ex officio among the lawsuit in this case is revoked, such disposition becomes null and void, and no longer exists, and a lawsuit seeking revocation against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

(2) As to the Plaintiff’s disposition of imposition of KRW 2,212,642 of global income tax amounting to KRW 12,652,820 for the Plaintiff on August 9, 2017, which was after the closing of the party’s trial proceedings, the head of the Yangcheon District Tax Office ex officio (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du18202, Dec. 13, 2012). As such, among the instant lawsuit, the determination of the reduction of imposition of KRW 2,212,642 of global income tax amount pertaining to the imposition of KRW 12,652,820 for the Plaintiff on August 9, 2017, the claim for

3. Determination as to the claim for revocation of the remainder of each taxation disposition of this case

A. The court's explanation on this part of the plaintiff's assertion is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance (from 3th to 4th 1th eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth e)

(B) In addition, the term "tax lawism and tax lawism" shall be added following the third place "(2)" and the fourth place "to impose" in the first place(b) shall be equal to the entry in the relevant laws and regulations attached to the relevant laws and regulations. (c) Determination 1)

arrow