(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.11.18 2016구합2410

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울행정법원 2016.11.18 2016구합2410

압류처분무효확인

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) is a corporation established on May 15, 1995 for the purpose of carrying on an engineering work business.

B. The Plaintiff is indicated as a shareholder holding 6,500 shares of B from 1997 to 130,000 shares issued by B (hereinafter “instant shares”), and the remainder of 123,50 shares is indicated as holding by C and their relatives.

C. On January 14, 2002, the Defendant seized the instant shares on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to pay value-added tax, income tax, etc.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). [Grounds for recognition] A] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the lawsuit of this case to the effect that the actual owner of the shares of this case in determining the Defendant’s defense prior to the merits of this case is deemed as C’s son, and that the disposition of this case is null and void as a seizure against D’s property, a third party, the Defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful on the grounds that the Plaintiff, not the beneficial owner of the shares of this case, cannot be deemed to have any direct and specific legal interest to seek confirmation of invalidity,

At the time of the instant disposition, the Defendant appears to have seized the Plaintiff’s shareholder rights as to B by means of the seizure of claims on the premise that the Plaintiff is a beneficial shareholder.

The instant disposition is a disposition on default against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to pay value-added tax, income tax, etc., and it is a matter of whether the subject of attachment is the Plaintiff’s property, and it is a matter of determination as to who is the beneficial shareholder of the instant shares.

Therefore, the defendant's defense prior to the merits cannot be accepted.

3. Whether the instant disposition is null and void

A. The plaintiff's assertion knows that he runs a construction business.

유사 판례

-서울행정법원 2016. 11. 18. 선고 2016구합2410 판결

-서울행정법원 2016.11.18 2016구합6122

-서울행정법원 2016. 11. 18. 선고 2016구합6122 판결

-서울서부지방법원 2017.08.22 2016가단221200

-서울고등법원 2016.05.27 2015나9501