1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On June 20, 201, the Plaintiff asserted that the registration of the establishment of the neighboring building was completed with respect to the multi-household houses on the ground of the Gangwon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City E, Gangwon-do, which are owned by D among the real estate subject to auction under the claim of the Plaintiff on June 20, 201, No. 102, No. 201, No. 202, No. 202, No. 101, No. 102, No. 102, No. 201, No. 202, No. 202, and No. 202 (hereinafter “each building of this case”).

However, the auction court of this case distributed KRW 85,724,990 to the Defendant, prior to the Plaintiff on the dividend of each of the buildings of this case, on the ground that the statutory due date for the tax claim against the Defendant (the delivery authority), who is the Defendant (the delivery authority), was prior to the date of the registration of creation of a mortgage over the Plaintiff.

The Defendant’s taxation claim as the oligopolistic shareholder of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) deemed D as the oligopolistic shareholder and imposed it as the secondary taxpayer. Since D was not an oligopolistic shareholder of the Nonparty Company, the Defendant’s taxation disposition as to D is null and void as a matter of course.

Therefore, the amount of dividends to the defendant should be deleted.

2. As long as the judgment disposition cannot be deemed to be null and void as it is reasonable, there is an illegal ground for revocation of the taxation disposition.

Even if the administrative disposition is valid until it is legally cancelled by the fairness or executory power of the administrative act.

As such, the validity of the above administrative disposition cannot be denied in the civil procedure, and in order to make the administrative disposition null and void as a matter of course, it is important and clear that the disposition is unlawful, as well as its defect is important and apparent, and the obvious defect here means that the administrative disposition itself is clearly expressed in an objective and external form.

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Da26690, Oct. 22, 1991). According to Article 39(1)2 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 11124, Dec. 31, 201), Article 39(1)2 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes.