logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2019.07.19 2018가합103290
동업관계확인 등
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that “In fact, the Plaintiff imposed global income tax and value-added tax only on the Plaintiff on the premise that the Plaintiff, even though engaged in his/her own business with the Defendants, and the tax authority imposed the global income tax and value-added tax on the Plaintiff on the premise that the Plaintiff independently operated his/her business.” The Plaintiff asserted that the former partnership was confirmed by judgment

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a lawsuit

A. Defendant C, C, and D asserts that the instant lawsuit is unlawful because it is not the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s legal status’s imminent anxiety and danger.

B. We examine ex officio the defendant B, who did not have the main defense of safety.

1) In a lawsuit for confirmation, the benefit of confirmation is recognized only when the Plaintiff’s right or legal status is currently unstable and dangerous and obtaining a judgment of confirmation is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate such apprehension and danger (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da21643, Mar. 30, 2017). Furthermore, barring any other special circumstance, a lawsuit for confirmation is allowed in cases where there is a benefit to immediately determine the current right or legal relationship between the parties to the dispute, and in general, it does not constitute a lawsuit for confirmation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da35565, 3572, May 10, 196). However, even if the Plaintiff has received a judgment against the Defendants in this case, the effect of the judgment does not extend to the tax authority, which is the third party, and thus, does not affect the effect of taxation against the Plaintiff.

Therefore, it is the most effective and appropriate means to directly dispute the validity of the taxation disposition in the procedure of administrative litigation, request for correction, etc. against the tax authorities.

arrow