administrative litigation seeking revocation of tax disposition must necessarily undergo a request for examination or adjudication, etc.

Administrative litigation seeking revocation of tax disposition shall necessarily undergo a request for examination or adjudgment as prescribed by the Framework Act on National Taxes, and in such case, a request for adjudication, etc. shall meet lawful requirements. Thus, if a request for adjudication, etc. is filed after the deadline for request, it shall not be deemed that

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

원고에 대하여, 피고 ☆☆세무서장이 2006. 5. 9.에 한 2003년 2기 부가가치세 8,183,354원의 부과처분 및 피고 ★★★세무서장이 2005. 8. 1.에 한 2003년 귀속 종합 소득세 8,073,970원의 부과처분을 모두 취소한다.

1. Circumstances of the disposition;

가. 원고는 서울 ●●구 ○○동 234-5 402호 소재 ◎◎◎◎(2003. 10. 14. 설립되어 2004. 1. 28. 폐업)의 사업자등록 명의인이다.

나. 피고 ☆☆세무서장은 원고가 2003년 2기 과세기간 중 자료상으로부터 실물거래 없이 공급가액 56,485,000원의 가공세금계산서를 수취하였음을 확인하고, 이 부분을 매입 세액불공제하여 2006. 5. 9. 2003년 2기 부가가치세 8,183,354원(이하 '이 사건 부가가 치세 처분'이라 한다)을 결정, 고지하였고, 피고 ★★★세무서장은 원고가 2003년 귀속 사업소득을 신고하지 아니하였다는 이유로 2005. 8. 1. 2003년 귀속 종합소득세 8,073,970원(이하 '이 사건 종합소득세 처분'이라 한다)을 결정, 고지하였다.

C. On May 2006, the Plaintiff was served with the disposition of the value-added tax of this case, and the Plaintiff did not file a request for evaluation or a request for trial under the Framework Act on National Taxes.

D. On August 2005, the Plaintiff received the instant disposition of global income tax, but did not file a request for examination or adjudication as prescribed by the Framework Act on National Taxes. After filing the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Tax Tribunal on September 30, 2009. On November 10, 2009, the Tax Tribunal dismissed the said request for adjudication on the grounds that the said request for adjudication was filed after the lapse of the period of request as prescribed by Articles 81 and 65(1)1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

【Ground for Recognition: Evidence No. 1, Evidence No. 2, Evidence No. 5, Evidence No. 4-1, and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The defendant's main defense

원고는 ◎◎◎◎를 실질적으로 운영한 바 없고, 사업자 명의를 도용당하였을 뿐이므로 이 사건 각 부과처분은 위법하다고 주장함에 대하여, 피고는 이 사건 소는 적법한 전심절차를 거치지 아니한 것으로서 부적법하므로 각하되어야 한다고 주장한다.

B. Determination

Administrative litigation seeking revocation of tax disposition shall necessarily undergo a request for examination or adjudgment as prescribed by the Framework Act on National Taxes, and in this case, a request for adjudication, etc. shall meet lawful requirements. Thus, if a request for adjudication, etc. is filed after the deadline for request, it shall not be deemed that it

In light of the above facts, the Plaintiff filed a request for a trial on September 30, 2009, which had passed since August 2005, the time when the notice of the instant disposition was received. Thus, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit in this case is unlawful since it did not go through lawful transfer procedures. Accordingly, the Defendant’s main safety defense is with merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.