Whether the instant lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the instant disposition is unlawful since it did not go through the pre-trial procedure.

Inasmuch as there is no evidence to prove that the Plaintiff had gone through the pre-trial procedure on the instant disposition under the Framework Act on National Taxes, the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant disposition is unlawful since it did not go through the pre-trial procedure.

Article 81-15 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Incheon District Court 2019Guhap662 and revocation of the name name global income tax

A lawsuit is unlawful because it has not gone through the procedure of the preceding trial.

3. Conclusion

It is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices to dismiss the instant lawsuit.

○ ○

○ Head of tax office

1, 2019.07

2, 2019.08

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

The disposition of imposition of global income tax of KRW 44,85,390, which was imposed on the Plaintiff on February 1, 2019 by the former Defendant on February 1, 2019 shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

가. ㅁㅁㅁ세무서장은 주식회사 ㅁㅁㅁㅁ건설(이하 '이 사건 회사'라 한다)이 2015 사업연도 법인세를 신고하지 않음에 따라 이 사건 회사의 2015 사업연도 소득금액을 692,434,957원으로 보아 이 사건 회사의 2015 사업연도 법인세액을 165,004,983원(가산세 포함)으로 경정하는 한편, 위 소득금액 692,434,957원이 사외로 유출되었으나 그 귀속이 불분명하다고 보아 이 사건 회사의 대표이사이던 원고에 대하여 위 소득금액 692,434,957원 중 원고가 2015년에 대표이사로 재직한 87일(2015. 1. 1. - 2015. 3. 27.)에 상응하는 부분인 163,149,058원(692,434,957원 × 87/365)을 상여로 소득처분하고 2018. 1. 2. 이 사건 회사에 소득금액변동통지를 하였다.

B. Accordingly, on February 1, 2019, the Defendant issued a correction and notification of the global income tax of KRW 44,855,390 (including additional tax) to the Plaintiff for the year 2015 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of evidence Nos. 2, 5, 6, 8, and 9, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The defendant's main defense

The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case is unlawful, since he himself only lent his name, not the actual representative director of the company of this case, and the defendant asserts that the disposition of this case is unlawful, and that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, since the plaintiff did not go through the pre-trial procedure, such as a request for examination or a request for trial

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

C. Determination

The main text of Article 55(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that "any person whose rights or interests have been infringed due to an illegal or unreasonable disposition or an absence of necessary disposition as a disposition under this Act or other tax-related Acts may request cancellation or modification of such disposition or request necessary disposition pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter." Article 56(2) provides that " Notwithstanding the main sentence of Article 18(1), Article 18(2) and (3) of the Administrative Litigation Act, any administrative litigation against an illegal disposition as provided in Article 55 shall not be filed without going through a request for examination or adjudgment and a decision thereon pursuant to this Act." Thus, in filing an administrative litigation seeking cancellation of a tax disposition, the procedure for the preceding trial must necessarily go through a prior trial procedure, such as a request for examination or adjudgment under the Framework Act on National Taxes. As such, a tax disposition must be necessarily required to go through a prior trial procedure and has characteristics, such as expertise, technology, and experience, prior to filing a lawsuit, to prevent the issues of facts and make it clear by having a superior administrative agency supervise and correct the previous disposition (see, etc.