Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul High Court-2015-Nu-43089 (2016.02.04)
Title
The judgment of the court of first instance is reversed, and the judgment is revoked, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed.
Summary
(Dismissal) Since it can be known that there was a decision of revocation of a reduction ex officio revocation of part, seeking revocation of an unexplosive disposition, which is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.
Related statutes
Tax amount paid under Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act
Cases
Supreme Court Decision 2016Du35601 Decided revocation of Disposition of Value-Added Tax
Plaintiff-Appellant
United StatesA
Defendant-Appellee
The Director of Incheon Tax Office
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul High Court 2015Nu43089 (2.04)
Imposition of Judgment
oly 2016.14
Text
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.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du18202, Dec. 13, 2012).
The record reveals that the Defendant rendered a decision of partial revocation of the instant disposition ex officio in accordance with the purport of the lower judgment on March 17, 2016, which was subsequent to the Defendant’s filing of the instant appeal. As such, the instant lawsuit sought revocation of a disposition that had not been extinguished and became unlawful due to lack of legal interest.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and since this case is sufficient for the court to directly judge, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed, and the total cost of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent