Any corrective disposition that is corrected according to the application for correction of business registration shall not be deemed an administrative disposition subject to the appeal.

In the case of joint businessmen, even if the joint businessmen were corrected as requested by some of them, the correction in this case shall not be deemed an administrative disposition subject to appeal.

Article 7 (Application for Business Registration and Issuance of Business Registration Certificate

Suwon District Court 2015Guhap64719 global income and revocation of disposition

AA

00. Head of tax office

on April 28, 2016

on October 31, 2016

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On July 2, 2014, the correction of the name of the representative of the business registration made against the plaintiff on July 2, 2014 from CCC, BB, and DD shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity that runs a tax-related service business, and registered as a representative director DD, CCC, and BB in its corporate register.

B. On March 12, 2008, the Plaintiff registered the business as DD, CCC, and BB. Around July 11, 2013, the Plaintiff agreed that DD, CCC, and BB, as the office was separated and agreed to operate the Sungnam Branch, and applied for the Defendant’s change of the representative of DD, CCC, and BB to CCC, and BB. Accordingly, the name of the representative of the business registration was changed to CCC and BB.

D. However, around May 2014, DDR filed an application with the Defendant for re-issuance of the name of the representative of business registration as DD, CCC, and BB three persons. Accordingly, on July 2, 2014, the Defendant re-issuance of the Plaintiff’s name of the representative of business registration from CCC, BB to DD, CCC, and BB (hereinafter “instant correction”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 7-1, 2, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Although the contentsDD, CCC, and BB of the Plaintiff’s assertion are registered as the representative director on the Plaintiff’s corporate register, the CCC and BB are in charge of managing the principal office, and the DD agreed to operate the Sungnam Branch separately, the correction of the Plaintiff’s representative to DD, CCC, and BB is unlawful.

3. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate

A. The Defendant’s correction of business registration does not bring about a change in the status as a business operator, and thus does not constitute an administrative disposition that is subject to an appeal litigation, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and accordingly, deemed unlawful.

B. In order for an administrative agency to have rejected an application for active action by a citizen to fall under a disposition, etc. subject to appeal litigation, the application must be an exercise of public authority or an equivalent administrative action, and the refusal should cause any change in the applicant’s legal relationship, and there must be the right to file an application in accordance with the laws and regulations or cooking to require the relevant citizen to file an action. However, business registration under the Value-Added Tax Act, etc. purported to allow the relevant tax office to identify the taxpayer and secure the taxation data. This is merely a report of business fact, which is established by submitting a business registration application to the head of the competent tax office, and the issuance of a business registration certificate is merely an act of issuing a certificate verifying such registration. Therefore, business registration, cancellation of registration, correction of business registration, etc. does not have any effect of changing the substantive legal relationship by affecting the status of the business entity (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Du2200, Jan. 27, 2011). In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s representative cannot be seen as a change in the Plaintiff’s legal status of administrative disposition.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.