Unless the taxation disposition is considered to be null and void as a matter of course, the validity of the taxation disposition cannot be denied in the civil procedure.

Unless a taxation disposition is deemed to be null and void as a matter of course, the validity of the taxation disposition cannot be denied in the civil procedure, and a person who has an indirect interest in the attachment disposition by a tax authority and did not have a legal direct interest in the attachment disposition is not eligible to seek the revocation of the attachment disposition.

Article 30 of the National Tax Collection Act

2015 grouped 12716 Demurrer against distribution

AA

○ ○

April 29, 2016

May 20, 2016

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

With respect to ○○ District Court ○○○○○ Branch 000,000 another real estate auction case, the dividend amount of KRW 00,000,000 against the Defendant among the dividend table prepared on October 00, 000 prepared on the same support, shall be corrected to KRW 00,000,000, respectively, and KRW 00,000 against the Plaintiff shall be corrected to KRW 00,00.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. BB purchased ○○○○○○-ri 00-0 00 000 000 ○○○○○○○, Inc. (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from the CCC on October 0, 000, and completed the registration of ownership transfer as 000 00 00 ○○ District Court’s 000 00 00 00 000.

나. ■■세무서장은 0000. 0. 0. BBB에게 양도소득세 00,000,000원을 납부기한 0000. 0. 00.로 정하여 부과하였으나, BBB이 이를 납부하지 아니하여, 체납액이 가산금을 포함하여 00,000,000원에 이르렀다.

C. Accordingly, on October 00, 000, the defendant seized the apartment of this case, and the registration of the above purport was completed as 00000 received on October 00, 000 from the ○○ District Court ○○○○○ Branch on the above basis.

D. The plaintiff purchased the apartment house of this case from BB on October 0, 000, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with the receipt No. 00000 on October 00, 000.

E. △△ corporation, the mortgagee of the apartment of this case, filed an application for the auction of real estate on the apartment of this case with ○○ District Court ○○○○○○○○ Branch, and the same support was decided to commence the auction on October 00, 00, and the registration of additional registration was completed on the same day (○○ District Court ○○○○○ Branch 000 another real estate auction, hereinafter referred to as “the voluntary auction”).

F. On October 00, 000, 000, ○○ District Court prepared a distribution schedule with the content that distributes the amount of KRW 00,000,000 to the Defendant (1st, 100%) (hereinafter “instant distribution schedule”), and the Plaintiff raised an objection against the entire amount of the Defendant’s distribution on the same day.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

For the following reasons, the instant distribution schedule must be revised as stated in the purport of the claim.

BBB은 ① 0000. 00. 0. DDD과 함께 EEE으로부터 ○○시 ○○동 00-00 대 117.4㎡ 및 그 지상 건물(이하 '○○동 건물'이라고 한다)을 매수하여, 그 무렵 각 1/2지분의 소유권이전등기를 마쳤고, ② 0000. 00. 00. FFF으로부터 ▽▽시 ▽▽구▽▽동 000 ▽▽아파트 000동 000호(이하 '▽▽시아파트'라고 한다)를 매수하여, 0000. 0. 00. 소유권이전등기를 마쳤다. BBB은 0000. 0. 00. GGG에게 ▽▽시아파트를 000,000,000원에 매도하였고, 0000. 0. 00. 소유권이전등기를 마쳐주었다. BBB이 위 매도 당시 소유하고 있던 ○○동 건물은 상가이고, ▽▽시아파트만이 주택이었으므로, BBB은 1가구 1주택으로서 ▽▽시아파트를 매도한다고 하더라도 양도소득세 비과세 대상이었다. 그럼에도 BBB에 대하여 양도소득세를 부과한 피고 소속 ■■세무서장의 과세처분은 위법할 뿐만 아니라, 위 과세처분에 기한 이 사건 아파트에 대한 압류처분도 위법하므로, 피고는 이 사건 임의경매절차에서 배당받을 수 없다.

3. Determination

As long as a taxation disposition cannot be deemed null and void as a matter of course, even if there exists an unlawful ground for revocation of the taxation disposition, such taxation disposition is valid until it is lawfully revoked by the fairness of administrative act or by the executory power (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da20179, Aug. 20, 199). Thus, the validity of such taxation disposition cannot be denied in civil procedure (see Supreme Court Decision 99Da20179, Aug. 20, 199). Comprehensively considering all the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, it is insufficient to deem that the defect of the taxation disposition against BB is null and void as the defect of the taxation disposition against BB is significant and apparent, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise

Furthermore, in cases where the tax authority seizes real estate owned by the taxpayer for the purpose of collecting taxes, the purchaser or the provisional attachment authority of such real estate has a de facto and indirect interest in the attachment disposition and does not have any direct and specific interest in law, and there is no standing to seek the revocation of the attachment disposition (see Supreme Court Decision 96Nu3241, Feb. 14, 1997). Accordingly, the Plaintiff who purchased the apartment of this case after the Defendant’s attachment cannot seek the revocation of the attachment disposition concerning the apartment of this case by the Defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion does not seem to have any mother or reason.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.