Seoul High Court 2012Nu2377 (20 June 20, 2012)

National Tax Service Review and Transfer 2011-0127 ( November 30, 2011)

The principle of prohibition of re-disposition is not effective if the dismissal ruling becomes final and conclusive.

(Summary of the Supreme Court) The principle of prohibition of re-disposition refers to the principle of prohibition of re-disposition which becomes final and conclusive, and the administrative agency shall not have the same effect as the cancelled disposition if it becomes final and conclusive, and the exclusion period of imposition shall not be reduced to one year, even though it is not recognized as effective, or there

2012Du1673 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

XX Kim

The Director of the Pacific District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2012Nu2377 Decided June 20, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Although examining all of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal, it is clear that the grounds of appeal by the appellant fall under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and thus, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final