early 2012west 4812 ( December 31, 2012)

Since the disposition of imposition was revoked ex officio, it shall be dismissed.

The disposition is not in existence after ex officio revocation of the disposition, and the revocation lawsuit against non-existent administrative disposition is illegal as there is no interest in the lawsuit.

Article 99-3 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act / [Special Taxation for Capital Gains Tax for Purchasers of Newly-built Houses

2013Gudan51230 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

The AA

Head of Yongsan Tax Office

August 13, 2015

August 27, 2015

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Cheong-gu Office

The defendant revoked the disposition of imposition of the capital gains tax OOO for the year 2007 against the plaintiff on June 7, 2012.

If an administrative disposition is revoked, the disposition becomes null and void, and no longer exists, and a lawsuit seeking revocation against non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Du5317, Sept. 28, 2006). However, the Defendant’s revocation ex officio of the disposition imposing capital gains tax stated in the purport of the claim that the Plaintiff seeks revocation while the lawsuit is pending is apparent by the respective entries and arguments in the evidence Nos. 2 and 5, and thus, the lawsuit in this case becomes null and void as it has no benefit of lawsuit. Accordingly, the lawsuit in this case is dismissed, and the litigation costs are to be borne by the Defendant under Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act