beta
Case Number of the previous trial
Cho High Court Decision 201Da1584 (No. 30, 2011)
Title
Since the period for filing a lawsuit has expired, the lawsuit is illegal.
Summary
Administrative litigation shall be filed within 90 days from the date of receipt of the decision of the trial, but since the time limit for filing the lawsuit expires, the lawsuit is illegal, and the defense of the tax authority is reasonable.
Cases
2012Guhap3222 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing corporate tax, etc.
Plaintiff
AAtory Co., Ltd.
Defendant
Kim Jong-soo
Conclusion of Pleadings
August 23, 2012
Imposition of Judgment
September 27, 2012
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim
The Defendant’s imposition of KRW 00,00, the corporate tax for the business year of 2008 against the Plaintiff on August 4, 2010, and KRW 00,00,00 for the business year of 208 shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Whether the lawsuit of this case is legitimate
(a)in the case of a taxation under tax-related Acts, it shall undergo the inquiry of the Tax Tribunal, and, if not, it shall not institute an administrative litigation, and the administrative litigation shall be filed within 90 days from the date of receipt of the notice of the decision of the trial, and it shall be the peremptory period (see Article 5
나. 살피건대， 갑 1호증의 2. 을 4호증의 1. 2의 각 기재에 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면 ① 청구취지 기재 각 처분(이하 '이 사건 처분'이라고 한다)의 전심절차라고 원고가 주장하는 조세심판원 조심2011부1584 결정(이하 '이 사건 결정'이라고 한다)이 2011. 9. 30. 있은 사실. ② 조세심판원은 2011. 9. 30. 이 사건 결정을 발송등기번호 0000 로 발송한 사실. 위 등기번호 우편물은 2011. 10. 5. 원고의 대리인인 세무사 조QQ에 게 송달된 사실을 각 인정할 수 있는바， 이에 비추어 볼 때 원고는 2011. 10. 5. 이 사건 결정의 통지를 받았다고 봄이 상당하다.
C. As to this, the Plaintiff alleged that he received the instant decision on November 5, 2011, but the Plaintiff stated the evidence Nos. 10 alone is insufficient to reverse it, and there is no other reflective evidence.
D. Therefore, the instant lawsuit filed on February 3, 201, which had been filed on October 5, 201, 90 days from October 5, 201, had been subject to the time limit for filing the lawsuit, and the Defendant’s main defense pointing this out is with merit (the Defendant has a main defense as to the disposition imposing the Party A's age tax in the instant disposition, which was not subject to the prior trial procedure, but the validity of the instant lawsuit is not separately determined as long as the whole period for filing the lawsuit in the instant case has expired).
2. Conclusion
If so, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed.