logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1966. 9. 27. 선고 66다1303 판결
[가옥명도][집14(3)민,107]
Main Issues

Effect of the disposition of public auction on real estate of the delinquent taxpayer without notice of public auction.

Summary of Judgment

Even if the public auction was conducted without notification of the public auction, it is not void as a matter of course.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 76 of the National Tax Collection Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 64Nu141 Delivered on March 9, 1965

Plaintiff-Appellee

Plaintiff

Defendant-Appellant

Defendant (Attorney Si-hwan, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

original decision

Seoul High Court Decision 65Na1806 delivered on June 3, 1966

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal No. 1 by the defendant's attorney are examined.

Despite the fact that the defendant's notice of "cases concerning the cancellation of a withholding agent" from the Minister of Finance and Economy as of May 31, 1961 and as of August 1221 is not a withholding agent, the claim that the original taxable on June 30, 1961 was a defect in the disposition of a withholding agent cannot be a legitimate appeal as a new fact-finding that was not asserted in the original judgment, and that the public sale of the delinquent taxpayer's real estate in accordance with the National Tax Collection Act is a disposition of a public sale of the delinquent taxpayer's real estate in accordance with the National Tax Collection Act, but even if the notice was given, it is not a public sale disposition of the original case (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 64Nu141, Mar. 9, 1965). Thus, there is no ground for objection.

The second ground of appeal is examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, there is no evidence to recognize that the market price of the real estate in this case is one million won, and since the State cannot be deemed as abuse of rights due to the public sale of the property in arrears due to the provisions of the National Tax Revenue Collection Act, the issue is groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Judge Do-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1966.6.3.선고 65나1806
본문참조조문
기타문서