logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.12.19 2019구합6073
재산압류처분말소등기절차이행 청구의 소
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 1, 2017, the Plaintiff opened a manufacturing business (the president system) with the trade name “C” at the place of business located in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, and registered the business to the Defendant on July 19, 2017, and closed the business on May 24, 2018.

B. The Plaintiff reported wage and salary income tax and value-added tax while operating C, and did not pay them. The Defendant issued a collection disposition against the Plaintiff as listed below.

(2) The following tax amounts: (a) The amount of taxes in arrears (including additional charges) on July 7, 2017; (b) on August 30, 2017; (c) on August 31, 2017; (d) on August 31, 2017; (c) on August 35, 300; (d) on August 36, 2017; (d) on September 36, 208; (e) on September 18, 2018; (e) on September 3, 2017; (e) on September 3, 2018; (e) on September 18, 2018; (e) on August 31, 2017; (f) on August 36, 2017; (f) on September 18, 2018; (f) on September 3, 2018; (f) on value-added tax amount of KRW 548.

C. The Defendant, even after the instant collection disposition, failed to pay the pertinent taxes even after the instant collection disposition, issued a seizure disposition on May 1, 2018 on the attached real estate indicated in the attachment (hereinafter “instant seizure disposition”) (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and accordingly, the registration of seizure was completed on May 1, 2018 as the receipt of the Busan District Court’s Branch Branch Branch of the Busan District Court, Busan District Court’s Branch of the Dongsan Branch of May 1, 2018.

(hereinafter “instant seizure registration”) D.

On March 12, 2019, the Plaintiff asserted on March 12, 2019 that the taxpayer of each tax of this case is D, not himself/herself, but the actual business owner of the above “C” and applied for the cancellation of attachment of the instant attachment disposition

The plaintiff is about the registration of seizure of this case.

arrow