Seoul High Court 2016Nu37791 (Law No. 25, 2016)

The plaintiffs' lawsuit is dismissed as it does not have the interest of lawsuit due to the absence of disposition.

The plaintiffs' lawsuit is dismissed as it is illegal because there is no interest in the lawsuit, seeking revocation of the disposition that is not already extinguished by the ex officio revocation of the disposition.

Article 2(3) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act; Article 42(1)3 of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 2016Du53425

○○ et al.

○ Head of tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2016Nu37791 Decided August 25, 2016

December 27, 2016

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and all plaintiffs' lawsuits shall be dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du18202, Dec. 13, 2012).

According to the records, the defendant can know the fact that the disposition of this case against the plaintiffs was revoked ex officio in accordance with the purport of the judgment below after filing the appeal of this case. Thus, the plaintiffs' lawsuit of this case is not extinguished and the lawsuit of this case was sought for revocation of a disposition without any legal interest

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed. Since this case is sufficient for the Supreme Court to directly judge, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and all plaintiffs' lawsuits shall be dismissed, and the total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent