Seoul High Court 2011Nu46189 (Law No. 17, 2012)

early 2010 Heavy3525 ( October 10, 201)

The revocation of the disposition of taxation ex officio, which is illegal as there is no interest in litigation.

Since the disposition was revoked ex officio after filing an appeal, the lawsuit of this case is to seek the revocation of the disposition that did not have been extinguished, and it is unlawful as there is no benefit

2012Du19915 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

Park AA

Head of Namyang District Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu46189 Decided August 17, 2012

November 29, 2012

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

If an administrative disposition is revoked, the disposition becomes 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 2011Du15343, Oct. 13, 201). According to the records, the defendant can be aware of the fact that the disposition of this case was revoked ex officio on September 25, 2012, which is after filing the appeal of this case. As such, the defendant seeks revocation of the disposition of this case on September 25, 2012, which is subsequent to the filing of the appeal of this case. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed, and the total cost of the lawsuit is assessed against the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent