early 2007west0753 (O6.21, 2007)

If a partial reduction or correction is made, whether the additional and increased additional charges for the original notice are extinguished or not;

In a case where a reduction or a correction is made, the first tax disposition remains within the scope where the amount of the tax disposition remains within the scope where the amount of the tax disposition was reduced, not after the first tax disposition was revoked. Thus, the imposition of additional dues and a increased additional dues should be determined based on the payment period, etc. of the first tax disposition

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff shall bear the litigation costs.

The disposition that the Defendant wrongfully collects to the Plaintiff KRW 182,920,615 due to additional dues and aggravated additional dues exceeding KRW 599,038,221 of global income tax for the year 2002 shall be revoked.

1. Circumstances of dispositions;

A. On May 31, 2001, the Plaintiff, from the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation in bankruptcy in ○○○○○-dong, 312-2 site, 313-1 site, 136.69 site, and above-ground offices, etc., 136.69 site, and 313-24 site, 15.5 site (hereinafter referred to as “instant real estate”) to purchase 2.5 billion won (the contract amount is KRW 20 million, the remainder payment date is October 31, 2001) and paid the down payment to the non-party company (hereinafter referred to as “the instant sales contract”).

B. On November 16, 2001, Nonparty Company notified the Plaintiff of the cancellation of the instant sales contract, and deposited KRW 400 million, a double of the said down payment.

C. On January 12, 2002, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the non-party company (○○ Central District Court 2002Gahap2473), such as seeking the implementation of the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer regarding the instant real estate. On July 15, 2002, the Plaintiff agreed to receive KRW 1 billion in lieu of giving up all rights to the instant real estate from the non-party company, and withdrawn the said lawsuit after receiving the said money.

라. ①원고는 위 공탁금 4억 원 중 이 사건 매매계약 해제에 따른 위약금 2억 원 및 위10억 원을 합한 12억 원에 대한 종합소득세 신고를 하지 아니하였고, 이에 피고는 위 12억 원을 소득세법 제21조 제1항 제10호, 제17호 소정의 위약금 또는 사례금에 해당하는 기타소득으로 보아 2006.12.1.원고에 대하여 2002년 귀속 종합소득세 664,590,980원을 납부기한을 2006.12.31.로 하여 결정・고지하였다.②피고는 원고에게 그 납세고지서를 원고의 당시 및 현 주소지인 '○○ ○○구 ♤♤동 125'로 송달하였고, 원고가 위 납부기한까지 납부하지 아니하자 2007.3.12.독촉장을 위 주소지로 송달하였다.

E. The Defendant reduced the global income tax amount for the year 2002 by 653,190,500 won according to the decision of the National Tax Tribunal (2007,0753).

F. (1) On July 27, 2007, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the revocation of the disposition imposing global income tax for the tax year 2002 (○○ Administrative Court 2007Guhap28489) and subsequently dismissed all of the appeals (Supreme Court 2008Du18984) (2.2.12.28, 2007). The Defendant reduced the amount of global income tax for the year 2002, the amount exceeding KRW 59,038,221, among the disposition imposing global income tax for the Plaintiff on December 1, 2006, which was imposed by the Defendant on the Plaintiff on the Plaintiff on December 1, 2006 (653,190,50).

G. Meanwhile, when the global income tax amount attributed to 2002 was reduced as above, the Defendant adjusted the amount of additional dues and increased additional dues accordingly.

H. For a period from February 1, 2007 to April 2, 2009, the Defendant collected KRW 599,038,221 as global income tax for the year 2002 as well as KRW 182,920,615 as additional dues and increased additional dues (hereinafter referred to as “instant additional dues, etc.”) in total, KRW 781,958,830 as global income tax for the year 2002 (hereinafter referred to as “instant collection disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without any dispute, Gap 1-6 evidence, Eul 1,2, and 3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the Parties’ Claims

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Defendant did not go through the payment notice and demand notice on the instant surcharges, etc. to the Plaintiff while global income tax for the year 2002 was reduced twice. Therefore, the Defendant’s collection of the instant surcharges, etc. is unlawful.

B. Defendant’s assertion

(1) The notice of additional dues and increased additional dues does not constitute a disposition subject to appeal litigation, and thus, the lawsuit of this case, which is based on the premise that the disposition of imposition of additional dues, etc. in this case exists, is unlawful (

(2)피고는 2006.12.1.2002년 귀속 종합소득세액을 결정・고지하면서 그 납부고지서를 당시 및 현재 원고의 주소지인 '○○ ○○구 ♤♤동 125'로 송달하였고, 원고가 그 납부기한까지 납부하지 아니하자 2007.3.12.독촉장을 위 주소지로 송달하였으며, 2002년 귀속 종합소득세액이 2차례 감액됨에 따라 이 사건 가산금 등 또한 그에 맞추어 감액하였다.

3. Judgment

A. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

The additional dues and increased additional dues under Articles 21 and 22 of the National Tax Collection Act naturally occur in accordance with the provisions of the above Act in cases where national taxes are in arrears, and the amount thereof is determined. However, in cases where the payment demand of the above additional dues and increased additional dues are unreasonable or defects exist in the procedure, it is possible to object to a revocation lawsuit against the disposition of collection (Supreme Court Decision 86Nu147 delivered on October 28, 1986). In this case, the health department, the defendant did not pay the income tax belonging to the year 2002 by the time limit for payment, and the defendant sent a demand notice to the plaintiff on March 12, 2007, and therefore the defendant's prior objection to the merits cannot be accepted.

B. Judgment on the merits

(i)related Acts and subordinate statutes;

Articles 21 and 22 of the National Tax Collection Act

(ii)judgments

(A) In a case where a tax office issued a tax disposition for reduction and correction subsequent to the issuance of a tax disposition, the original tax disposition shall continue to exist within the scope where the initial tax disposition is reduced, not with an effect to fix a specific tax obligation as to the remaining amount after the first revocation of the tax disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Du2013, Sept. 22, 2000).

(B) Even if the amount of global income tax for the year 2002, which was paid by the Plaintiff, was reduced two times from the initially 664,590,980 won, and eventually, was reduced to KRW 599,038,221, the initial tax disposition is valid within the scope of KRW 599,038,221, and the imposition of the instant additional dues, etc. shall be determined based on the initial payment deadline, etc. As long as the Defendant lawfully served a tax notice and a reminder on the Plaintiff, the amount of global income tax for the year 2002 was reduced twice and the amount of global income tax for the year 202 was reduced again, and each other did not go through payment procedures, it cannot be deemed unlawful. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit, and the instant collection disposition

3.In conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.