Time of request for correction;

The period of request for correction is 1.10 to 1.25 days in case where the National Tax Tribunal which received a request for adjudgment prepares a request for correction to the effect that it will submit an original copy of the approved approval by January 10, 1979 and sent it to the 13th of the same month.

Articles 81 and 63 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 52 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Supreme Court Decision 79Nu303 delivered on October 14, 1980, 81Nu145 delivered on December 8, 1981

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

Head of Southern District Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 79Gu352 delivered on February 27, 1980

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the determination of the National Tax Tribunal on an appeal shall be made within 90 days from the date of receipt of the appeal: Provided, That the National Tax Tribunal may, if it deems that the contents and procedures of the appeal are legitimate, demand correction within a reasonable period. The above correction period shall be deemed dismissed, and an administrative litigation on a disposition for national tax imposition shall be filed within 60 days from the date of receipt of the notice of the decision or rejection. The period for correction shall be deemed to be 97 days after 197 days after 97 days after 97 days after 97 days after 97 days after 97 days after 97 days after 97 days after 97 days after 197 days after the above request for correction and correction was received. The period for correction and correction shall be deemed to have been 9 days after 9 days after 197 days after the date of receipt of the decision to the original request for correction and correction. Accordingly, the above request for correction and correction shall take effect only after 19 days after 197 days after the receipt of the written request for correction and correction and notification.

According to Articles 81 and 63(1) of the same Act, a request for correction is to be made for a reasonable period of time, and according to Article 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the National Tax Tribunal Regulations and Article 7(3) of the Regulations on the Operation of National Tax Tribunal, Article 52(1)3 of the same Act, Article 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 7(3) of the Regulations on the Operation of National Tax Tribunal, the period for correction shall be the period specified in attached Form 30, and the period for correction shall be the period specified in the written request for correction. Thus, in light of the purport of the same Act, a certain period for correction shall be determined in advance and the request for correction shall be deemed to have been made. According to the records, since the first written request for correction includes the date for correction of the National Tax Tribunal, the period for correction shall be calculated according to the purport of the above Act (see Supreme Court Decision 79Nu303, Oct. 14, 1980).

Therefore, as seen above, the period for correction at the time of the first request for correction is 15 days, and the above expiration date shall be extended from January 18, 1979 to 15 days, which is the expiration date of the original decision under Articles 81 and 63 of the Framework Act on National Taxes. Thus, the above expiration date shall be extended from February 2, 1979, considering whether the subsequent request for correction and the subsequent lawsuit have been filed within the new decision period or within the new decision period, and if the lawsuit was filed within the legitimate period, the determination on the merits shall be made. However, if the court below calculated the correction period at the beginning date of the delivery of the request for correction to the plaintiff and calculated the correction period to the plaintiff by January 31, 1979, it shall be deemed that the second request for correction after the lapse of the original decision shall not be effective, and therefore, if the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the period for correction, or by misunderstanding the legal principles on the national tax adjudication period, it shall not be reversed.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court, which is the court below, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)