Seoul Administrative Court 2013Guhap2327 ( November 12, 2013)

(2) The term of filing a lawsuit has expired and is illegal;

It is confirmed that a subsequent notice following the review decision by the Tax Tribunal has been received, and it is apparent that the plaintiffs' lawsuit was filed after the lapse of 90 days prescribed by the Administrative Litigation Act from that time. Thus, the lawsuit in this case is not illegal because the period for filing the lawsuit in this case has expired.

Article 56 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

2013Nu32078 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Gift Tax

1. KimA 2. KimB 3. ThisCC

2. The head of the sericultural tax office (the head of the Songpa District Tax Office before its correction);

3. The director of the tax office of distribution.

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2013Guhap2327 decided November 12, 2013

June 17, 2014

July 1, 2014

1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the disposition of gift tax on October 10, 2007 by the director of the regional tax office on June 1, 201 against the plaintiff KimA is revoked where the director of the regional tax office, on June 8, 2011, the director of the regional tax office, on the part of the defendant KimB, imposed the gift tax on the plaintiff KimB on the plaintiff KimB on June 1, 201, and the director of the regional tax office, on March 1, 2011, the director of the regional tax office, on the part of the plaintiff KimB.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's reasoning concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following matters in Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The addition;

The plaintiffs asserted that the notice of the results of the reinvestigation pursuant to the review decision by the Tax Tribunal is not a legitimate notice given by the head of ○○○○, not the Defendants. However, whether to take charge of the review decision by the Tax Tribunal, the subsequent review decision, and the notice of the results is merely an internal role sharing among the tax authorities within the National Tax Service on the allocation or delegation of authority between the tax authorities and its external effect is not changed. Furthermore, the notice of the results sent by the head of ○○○○ Tax Office to the plaintiffs is specified by the Tax Tribunal, which served as the basis of the review decision by the Tax Tribunal. The results of the reinvestigation on the taxable year, tax items, tax bases, and tax

In addition, it is written that there is a "the first disposition party to which measures are taken", and this notice is a follow-up disposition pursuant to the decision to appeal, so that it is possible to institute an administrative litigation within 90 days from the date of receipt of the notice, as long as the content on the method of appeal (each of subparagraph 6-1, 2, and 3 of the evidence) is specified (the notice of the result of reinvestigation is legitimate, and therefore the first plaintiff's assertion is without merit on a different premise."

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed, and the judgment of the court of first instance with the same conclusion is just, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.