Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap19063 ( December 12, 2014)

The additional payment for arrears occurs from the day following the due date of payment.

In addition, it is reasonable to see that the additional payment is made from the day following the due date of payment not from the day on which the judgment seeking cancellation of the disposition imposing the main tax becomes final and conclusive.

Article 47-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes:

2015Nu32355 Confirmation of the existence of additional tax on taxation claims

KoreaA

head of Sung Dong Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2014Guhap19063 decided December 12, 2014

June 19, 2015

July 10, 2015

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

On February 9, 2009, the Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu43265 decided June 21, 2013 that "the revocation of the part exceeding the OO won among the disposition of imposition of global income tax OO for the plaintiff on February 9, 2009" is confirmed that the additional payment for the principal OOO won does not exist until December 26, 2013, which is the date the Supreme Court's decision became final and conclusive.

The cause of the instant claim does not seek confirmation of the absence of the Defendant’s disposition of imposition of the additional tax for unfaithful payment against the Plaintiff, but rather, for global income tax for 2006 that the Defendant imposed on the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff appears to be a party suit under public law as it seeks confirmation of the absence of the Plaintiff’s additional tax for unfaithful payment until the tax amount becomes final and conclusive by the judgment. However, a party suit under public law is not a disposition agency but a party (the Republic of Korea in this case) who is the subject of legal relations (the Republic of Korea in this case), but the Plaintiff erroneously designated the Defendant as the head of the Sungdong Tax Office, the disposition agency, the Plaintiff, as the head of Sungdong Tax Office (the first instance court stated that the Plaintiff

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus it shall be dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair and it is so revoked and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.