Attachment of claims shall have the effect only on the delinquent amount at the time of seizure of claims.

Attachment of claims shall have an impact on the delinquent amount within the limit of delinquent amount, and if there is no reason to interrupt or suspend extinctive prescription, the period of extinctive prescription for national taxes shall be five years, and the claim for delivery of extinguished national taxes shall be void.

Article 27 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Article 42 (Effect of Attachment of Claims)

2014 Ghana 14323

OO

Korea

December 19, 2014

2015.01.30

1. Of the distribution schedule prepared by the same court on June 11, 2014 with respect to a compulsory auction case for real estate (OO district court 2013 0000), the amount of dividends to the defendant shall be KRW 000,000, and the amount of dividends to the plaintiff shall be KRW 000,000, respectively.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Basic facts

A. As to 1/4 shares among 431-8 m2,160 m2,00 OO-dong O-dong OO-dong OO-dong 431-12 m2,161 m2, the Plaintiff filed an application for compulsory auction of real estate under O district court 2013 m2000,000 among the principal and interest on loans to AA-dong O-dong 431-8 m2,161 m2,161 m2, around 2009 (hereinafter referred to as "the compulsory auction of this case"), in the above compulsory auction case, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the compulsory auction of real estate under the O-O tax secretary (hereinafter referred to as "the Defendant") under the Defendant's O-O tax secretary on November 25, 2013 with the statutory deadline for payment on May 31, 2005 as a national tax claim (hereinafter referred to as "the capital gains tax claim of this case").

B. On June 11, 2014, the above court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes KRW 000 to the Defendant, and KRW 000 to the Plaintiff in the third order, on the date of distribution of the compulsory auction of this case.

C. On the date of distribution, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the Defendant regarding the total amount of dividends to the Defendant, and thereafter filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the distribution against the Defendant on June 18, 2014.

Facts that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the cause of the claim

Article 27(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 911, Jan. 1, 2010) provides that “The extinctive prescription shall expire if the State’s right to collect national taxes is not exercised for five years from the time it can be exercised.” Article 27(3) of the same Act provides that when the State’s right to collect national taxes can be exercised under the same provision shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree. Accordingly, Article 12-4(1)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22038, Feb. 18, 2010) provides that “in the case of a national tax for which the duty to pay taxes is finalized by a report on the tax base and the amount of taxes, the day following the statutory due date for payment for which the tax return is filed shall be the day when the statutory due date is extended.” Article 27(2)3 of the same Act provides that “if the statutory due date for payment is extended, the day following such extended may exercise the State’s right

On July 1, 2013, when five years have elapsed since July 1, 2008, the time limit for payment of the national tax of this case was as seen earlier, it is reasonable to view that the national tax of this case terminated all by prescription, pursuant to Article 27(1) and (3) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes and Article 12-4(1)1 and Article 12-4(2)3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, it is reasonable to delete the dividend of this case, which is distributed to the Defendant among the dividends of this case, and distribute the dividend to the Plaintiff who is a junior right holder, the dividend amount of the Plaintiff ought to be adjusted as KRW 000,000, respectively.

B. Judgment on the defendant's defense

1) As to this, the Defendant seized credit card sales claims against customers of AA for the collection of delinquent national taxes against AA, and thus, the extinctive prescription of the instant national tax claims was suspended, and thus, the instant dividends are justified.

According to the evidence evidence No. 2, the defendant, although it is recognized on December 11, 2007 that the credit card sales claims against the customer of the AA were seized, the following circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of evidence and pleadings are not to collect national taxes of this case, but to be conducted with respect to global income tax and value added tax on AA under the defendant's OO free shop. (2) The attachment under Article 47 (1) of the National Tax Collection Act provides that the attachment under paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that "the attachment shall take effect at the time of completion of its registration or enrollment," and the attachment under paragraph (1) of the same Article provides that "the attachment shall be effective only to the delinquent amount of national taxes for which the statutory due date under Article 35 (1) 3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes has arrived before the ownership of the relevant attached property is transferred." However, the above provision provides that the attachment of the credit card sales claims shall not affect the obligor's defense to the extent of the amount in arrears under paragraph (1) of the same Article 4).

(2) In addition, on July 28, 2008, the defendant tried to identify and seize the real estate, movable property, remaining property, cash, installment savings, and securities of AA in order to secure the national tax claim of this case. However, since there is no object subject to the disposition of loss where the property of the next delinquent taxpayer is discovered after the occurrence of the occurrence of the property of the next delinquent taxpayer, the disposition of loss was suspended on the condition that the recovery from the loss would be recovered. Thus, Article 28(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that the extinctive prescription period of the national tax claim of this case is suspended, as a ground for suspending the extinctive prescription period of the right to collect national tax, the notice of tax payment or demand for payment, and the seizure order provides that the tax official initiates the procedure of seizing the taxpayer's property pursuant to Article 24 of the National Tax Collection Act. Thus, even if the tax official newly searched the delinquent taxpayer's house, vessel, warehouse, and other places, the statute of limitations period of limitations has expired from 200 days to 30.1.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.