When the original taxation disposition has been reduced or corrected, the taxation disposition that is the subject of administrative litigation

In cases where a tax authority finds an error or omission in the tax base and amount of tax subsequent to a tax disposition and revises it, it is nothing more than cancelling part of the tax base and amount of tax initially determined in the tax disposition when such a reduction was made. Therefore, the first taxation disposition continues to exist within the scope of the reduced amount, and only this disposition is subject to litigation, and the correction disposition itself cannot be subject to litigation.

Article 19 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Supreme Court Decision 84Nu225 Delivered on December 11, 1984

Plaintiff

Head of Western Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu1290 delivered on July 15, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the plaintiff was notified of the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of 18,751,878 won, defense tax of 3,750,375 won as of December 17, 1983 by the defendant on December 17, 1983, and then the defendant was decided to reduce capital gains tax of 1,342,874 won and defense tax of 134,287 won as of February 15, 1984 on the ground that there was an error in the tax base and tax amount of the initial disposition, the court below rejected the first disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of 1,342,874 won and defense tax of 134,287 won as of March 6, 1984; request for review by the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on May 23, 1984; the first disposition of reduction changed only the contents of the initial disposition and did not have an independent effect as an independent disposition; therefore, the defendant's objection or procedure of this case should be determined as of this case.

2. In a case where a tax authority finds an error or omission in the tax base and amount of tax and revises it after the tax authority issued a tax disposition, it was merely to cancel part of the tax base and amount of tax determined in the initial tax disposition when the reduction is completed, and thus, the tax disposition continues to exist within the scope of the reduction of the tax base and amount of tax determined in the initial tax disposition, only this disposition is subject to litigation, and the disposition itself cannot be subject to litigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 84Nu225, Dec. 11, 1984).

Therefore, even in the case of the reduction of the instant case, the original disposition is only the subject of litigation, and it is reasonable to determine the original disposition based on the initial disposition.

3. Meanwhile, according to the records, it is clear that the plaintiff is subject to the defendant's disposition of correction on February 15, 1984 as the object of the revocation lawsuit in this case. As seen above, the correction disposition itself cannot be subject to a lawsuit. As such, the administrative disposition to seek revocation in this case should be partly revoked by the correction disposition among the disposition of correction on December 17, 1983 and its effect still remains.

Therefore, the court below should dismiss the lawsuit of this case on the ground that the plaintiff has no legal interest in seeking revocation as a disposition beneficial to the plaintiff, without examining the legitimacy of the procedure of the previous trial if it is the previous one, after identifying whether the part of the previous one remains effective as the subject matter of lawsuit and whether the previous one is the subject matter of lawsuit, and then whether the previous one is the subject matter of lawsuit, such as the original one, should be the basis of the previous one.

Therefore, although the judgment of the court below is defective in determining the legitimacy of the previous trial procedure based on the original disposition that the plaintiff takes the subject of the revocation lawsuit of this case as a correction disposition, it cannot affect the conclusion of the judgment that dismissed the lawsuit of this case.

4. 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.

Justices Shin Jong-sung (Presiding Justice)