A decision to reject a refund of a national tax refund decision or a request for this decision shall not be deemed a disposition subject to an appeal litigation.

A decision to reject a refund of a national tax refund decision or a request for this decision shall not be deemed a disposition subject to an appeal litigation.

Article 51 (Appropriation and Refund of National Tax Refund)

Seoul Administrative Court 2015Guhap577

Receipt of gift property (hereinafter referred to as "certificated property"), and a donation shall be made with the value of donated property of KRW 1,080,406,400.

The report and payment of 251,857,830 won was made.

B. As the decedent died on October 27, 2009, the plaintiff caused the gift property of this case in advance.

In addition to inherited property, inheritance tax was reported and paid, and the defendant additionally paid to the plaintiff.

No taxes are imposed.

C. Six of the Plaintiff’s punishments, including SouthB, against the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s ASEAN

The Seoul Northern District Court filed a lawsuit on the claim for the return of legal reserve of inheritance property, and the Seoul Northern District Court decided 2011.

6. The plaintiff, on November 17, 2010, received the certificate of this case against the punishment of the plaintiff due to the plaintiff's return of legal reserve of inheritance on November 17, 2010.

Procedures for the registration of ownership transfer concerning part of the property (hereinafter referred to as "property returned as a legal reserve of inheritance");

C. The mediation was concluded with the content of "C".

D. According to the above conciliation result, the defendant shall revaluated the returned property of legal reserve and add the inherited property to inherited property.

(The value of property returned as at the date of donation was deducted from the inherited property) advance donation property

The purport of not deducting KRW 147,214,780 equivalent to the property refunded as a legal reserve of inheritance

On December 16, 2013, inheritance tax amounting to KRW 838,866,770 was corrected and notified to the Plaintiff.

E. On March 12, 2014, the Plaintiff’s refund of KRW 147,214,780, etc. of the amount of gift tax paid, the gift tax of which was revoked.

The Defendant filed an objection on May 7, 2014. The Defendant partially accepted the objection.

After cancelling ex officio a disposition imposing gift tax of KRW 139,720,250, the amount shall be refunded to the Plaintiff.

Although there was no additional payment on the refund of national taxes.

F. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal on July 7, 2014, but the Tax Tribunal decided on July 2014.

12. 29. The ruling dismissing the above appeal was made.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the whole pleadings

purport of this chapter

2. The plaintiff's assertion

The additional payment on the refund of national tax can be separated from the refund of national tax as a legal interest on unjust enrichment of the State.

Therefore, the refund of national tax should be paid together with the refund of national tax when the refund of national tax is paid.

However, while the defendant pays the tax refund of KRW 139,720,250 to the plaintiff, it shall refund national taxes to the plaintiff.

Since additional dues were not paid, the disposition rejecting the payment of additional dues on the refund of national taxes is illegal.

3. Relevant statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

4. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

Ex officio, the lawsuit in this case is determined on the additional payment of national taxes as prescribed in Article 52 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

Plaintiff’s objection filed on March 12, 2014 by the Defendant, impliedly, May 7, 2014

I seem to seek the cancellation of the rejection decision.

However, the provisions of Articles 51(1) and 52 of the Framework Act on National Taxes such as refund of national taxes for which claim for repayment becomes final.

It provides for the refund procedures of tax authorities as internal procedures for handling taxes and additional charges.

only by the determination of the national tax refund (including additional charges) by such determination, the claim for repayment is confirmed.

Since it is not a national tax refund decision or an application seeking this decision, a refusal decision to refund a national tax refund.

not specifically and directly affecting the existence or scope of the right to claim the repayment of the taxpayer;

Inasmuch as a disposition is not a disposition, it shall not be deemed a disposition that is subject to an appeal litigation (Supreme Court Decision 2010 February 2010)

25. See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Du18284, supra)

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s refund equivalent to KRW 139,720,250 as seen earlier against the State

In addition to whether the amount equivalent to the additional payment on the refund of national tax can be claimed as civil action, this does not apply.

A lawsuit is unlawful, which fails to meet the eligibility requirements for an appeal litigation.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

South H

S Director of the Tax Office

15.08.21

2015.18

1. Basic facts

A. On April 12, 2002, October 6, 2003, 2003, October 8, 2003, and October 10, 2003, the Plaintiff is a 10 parcel (hereinafter referred to as “the decedent”) in the light of both sides from Nam-A (hereinafter referred to as “the decedent”).