logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.06.13 2018구합67368
제2차납세의무자지정처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Details of the disposition

From April 17, 2001 to June 31, 2016, the Plaintiff was registered as a member attorney-at-law according to the certified transcript of corporate register of a law firm B (hereinafter “foreign corporation”).

When the defendant could not cover the delinquent amount of the non-party corporation's assets, it shall be deemed that the plaintiff is a general partner of the non-party corporation under the Commercial Act, and as to the total amount of 241,189,150 won of the delinquent amount of each value-added tax, corporate tax, wage and salary tax, etc. listed in the attached Table 2 of which tax liability was established during the plaintiff's service period, the plaintiff designated the plaintiff as the secondary taxpayer under Article 39 subparagraph 1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and issued

(hereinafter “instant disposition”. However, at the time of November 2018, the Defendant continuously collected the credit card sales claim of the non-party corporation, and the tax amount in arrears of the non-party corporation was reduced to KRW 40,157,910 as shown in attached Table 1.

On April 13, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition, and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on April 13, 2017, but was dismissed on May 1, 2018.

[Grounds for recognition] The plaintiff's assertion that Gap evidence 1-2, Eul evidence 1-1-2, and Eul evidence 1-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings is as follows: the defendant merely indicated only the tax items and unpaid tax amount on the notice at the time of the disposition of this case, but not notified by the tax payment notice stating the tax base, excessive tax rate, etc.

(1) Article 39 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes and Article 58 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act do not directly stipulate a member attorney-at-law of a law firm as a general partner, and Article 39 (1) of the same Act and Article 58 (1) of the same Act impose a non-joint and several liability on a law firm based on the partnership system.

arrow