Daejeon District Court-2016-Gu Partnership-959 (2017.05)

It is not permitted because it conflicts with res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment of the previous lawsuit in this case

Since res judicata of a final and conclusive judgment affects a judgment on the existence of legal relations asserted as a subject matter of a lawsuit, filing a subsequent suit between the same parties on the same subject matter of a lawsuit between the parties is not permissible as it conflicts with res judicata of the final and conclusive judgment in the previous suit

Daejeon High Court 2017Nu1198 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing Additional Tax

00

00. Head of tax office

Daejeon District Court Decision 2016Guhap959 Decided 2017.05

2017.20

November 08, 2017

1. The plaintiff's claim that was changed in exchange in this court is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance court is revoked. The defendant confirmed that the imposition of penalty tax imposed on the plaintiff on December 1, 2014 is null and void (the plaintiff sought at the first instance court revocation of the imposition of penalty tax on December 1, 201 and the imposition of penalty tax on the gift tax on December 1, 2014, which the defendant claimed against the plaintiff on December 1, 201, but at the appellate court, amended the purport of the claim as above).

1. Details of the disposition;

Since the contents to be stated in this part are the same as the contents of the judgment of the court of first instance, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, they are quoted as they are.

2. Determination

A. In a lawsuit seeking revocation of a tax disposition, the substantive and procedural illegality of the tax disposition is the cause of revocation. The subject matter of the trial is the objective existence of the tax base and tax amount, which are the tax obligations recognized by the tax authority's taxation disposition, i.e., the propriety of the relevant taxation disposition. When the judgment dismissing the claim for revocation of a tax disposition becomes final and conclusive, res judicata has been created as to the legitimacy of the disposition, and the plaintiff cannot seek nullification of the final and conclusive judgment dismissed in the lawsuit seeking revocation of the tax disposition. Thus, res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment dismissed in the lawsuit seeking nullification of the said taxation disposition also extends to the lawsuit seeking nullification of the said taxation disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Nu9777, Apr. 27, 1993; 95Nu180, Jun. 25, 1996; 98Da10854, Jul. 24, 1998; 202Du3669, May 16, 2003).

B. As seen earlier, the Plaintiff filed a claim for revocation on the ground that the imposition of additional tax on gift tax as of December 1, 2014 was unlawful through the previous lawsuit in the instant case, and was sentenced to a judgment against which the claim was rejected. The judgment against the Plaintiff became final and conclusive as is. As such, res judicata has arisen as to the legitimacy of the imposition of additional tax on gift tax as of December 1, 2014, and the res judicata effect extends to the instant lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidity of the imposition of additional tax on gift tax as of December 1, 2014, which was filed again after the judgment against the Plaintiff became final and conclusive.

C. Therefore, the Plaintiff may no longer dispute as to the effect that the imposition of additional tax on the gift tax on December 1, 2014 is null and void according to the res judicata of the judgment against the Plaintiff.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case changed to exchange in this court is groundless.

Each decision shall be made as per Disposition.