It is reasonable to view that the plaintiff does not fall under the oligopolistic shareholder who bears the secondary tax liability for the delinquent corporate tax, etc. of AA Construction.

It is reasonable to view that the original plaintiff is merely a shareholder in the form as of the date when the liability to pay delinquent corporate tax, etc. for AA Construction was established and does not constitute an oligopolistic shareholder who bears the secondary liability to pay delinquent corporate tax, etc. for AA Construction.

Article 39 (Secondary Liability to Pay Taxes by Investor)

2017du56483 The revocation of the designation as the person liable for secondary tax payment.

Kim Ho-su

Head of the Office of Government

Seoul High Court Decision 2016Nu67532 Decided July 14, 2017

oly 31, 2017

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The records of this case and the judgment below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the appellant's grounds of appeal are examined.

The argument regarding the appeal is clearly without merit because it falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.