Whether extinctive prescription for the amount of delinquent tax which was written off expires

The disposition of deficits was excluded from the grounds for the extinction of tax liability (Enforcement December 30, 1996), and the seizure registration constitutes grounds for suspending extinctive prescription.

2019 Ghana5206 (Lawsuit of Claim for Cancellation of Attachment Registration)

DelegationO

Korea

May 24, 2019

July 19, 2019

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The defendant of the Gu office's branch office will implement the procedure for cancellation registration of each attachment registration completed on March 4, 1998 by the Seoul Central District Court Registry No. 0000 of the receipt on March 4, 1998, by the same registry office No. 0000 of the receipt on January 15, 200, and by the same registry office No. 00000 of the receipt on July 13, 2017.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

The defendant completed three registration of seizure as stated in the separate list owned by the plaintiff on the real estate in the separate list owned by the plaintiff. Since the tax in arrears, which caused each of the above registration of seizure, has expired by prescription, or 5 years have passed since the tax was notified, the defendant is liable to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of each of the above registration of seizure to the plaintiff.

2. Determination

Since extinctive prescription of the right to collect the national tax is interrupted if there is "a seizure" (Article 28(1)4 of the Framework Act on National Taxes).

When each seizure registration such as the record has been completed, the extinctive prescription of the Defendant’s tax claim against the Plaintiff shall be expired.

In contrast, the statute of limitations has expired as alleged by the Plaintiff.

There is no other evidence that can be admitted.

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, the defendant shall pay global income tax, value added tax, etc. to the plaintiff.

It is recognized that a disposal of deficit with respect to a claim equivalent to KRW 198,933,510 has been made (written in the above claim)

The registration office of the Seoul Central District Court No. 0000 received on March 4, 1998, and the same registry office among the registration of seizure.

Each registration of seizure completed on January 15, 2000 by the receipt No. 0000 of the receipt of each of the above claims shall be executed.

Registration of seizure, which is completed on July 13, 2017 by the same registry office, is shown to be a completed registration, and completed on July 13, 2017 by the same registry office

It seems that the tax claim has not yet been disposed of.

However, Article 26 subparagraph 1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes before the amendment by Act No. 5189 of December 30, 1996

'Disposition on Deficits', which is defined as one of the grounds for extinguishment of tax liability, is amended under the Framework Act on National Taxes.

The grounds for the extinguishment of tax liability were excluded from the grounds for the extinguishment of tax liability (in force from December 30, 1996), and the defendant's above disposal of deficits.

Since it appears that it was made after the amendment of the above Act, as to tax claims in arrears by the plaintiff

Even if a write-off was made, the liability for tax payment is not extinguished due to it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.