logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2017.11.14 2017구합64584
압류해제거부처분취소
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. On November 2, 2011, the Defendant seized No. 101 Dong 3104 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) B apartment in Silung-si, R&S, for which the registration of ownership preservation was made in the future, in order to collect the value-added tax in arrears by A&S Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A&S”).

(hereinafter “instant attachment disposition”). (b)

The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on May 24, 2012 due to sale on the same day.

C. On July 25, 2016, the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to release the attachment of the instant apartment, but the Defendant refused to release the attachment on the ground that the instant apartment remains in arrears on August 5, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant refusal disposition”) D.

On October 6, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, but was dismissed on February 17, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 18, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff asserted that prior to the instant attachment disposition, the Plaintiff: (a) received the instant real estate from A T&S prior to the instant attachment disposition; (b) completed the move-in report; and (c) H&S paid all the relevant tax amount by trusting that the Plaintiff was notified of the tax amount in arrears by the Middle Regional Tax Office at the time of completing the registration of ownership transfer concerning the instant real estate (e.g., May 24, 2012); and (b) the Defendant’s refusal to cancel the instant attachment disposition on the ground that there is additional tax amount not included in the above notification, is contrary to the principle of trust and good faith; (c)

3. The details of the relevant statutes are as shown in attached Form 1;

4. Determination on the legitimacy of the refusal disposition of this case

(a) Article 47(2) of the National Tax Collection Act provides that “The attachment under paragraph(1) shall be made before the ownership of the relevant attached property is transferred.

arrow