Whether or not a non-payment notification disposition is null and void as a matter of course without being added to the actual business.

In a case where there are objective reasons to believe that a certain legal relations or factual relations which are not subject to taxation are subject to taxation, and where it is possible to accurately investigate the factual relations on which it is subject to taxation, it cannot be deemed apparent even if the defect is serious, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the unlawful taxation disposition that misleads the fact subject to taxation cannot be necessarily invalidated.

Article 14 (Real Taxation)

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff shall bear the litigation costs.

On April 6, 200, the Defendant confirmed that the imposition of global income tax of 18,278,476 won, resident tax of 1,827,847 won, resident tax of 1,827,847 won, and global income tax of 87,840 won and resident tax of 87,784 won against the Plaintiff on January 3, 2000 is null and void.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Trade name on April 25, 1997: Business operator: Plaintiff, location of location: Seoul ○○○○-dong 31-36, type of business: Food and accommodation business, type of entertainment business, and type of business: Business registration as a dan○-gu.

B. As of January 3, 200, the Defendant issued each of the instant dispositions imposing global income tax of KRW 877,840, resident tax of KRW 87,784 as of January 3, 200, and KRW 18,278,476 as of April 6, 1997, and resident tax of KRW 18,278,47,827,847 as of April 6, 200.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on this safety defense

The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, since the plaintiff did not go through the procedure of the previous trial on the disposition of this case.

However, the plaintiff's claim in this case is a confirmation of invalidity of the disposition of this case, and it is only applicable to the case where the defendant files a lawsuit seeking revocation of a disposition of objection or illegality of omission, and it is not applicable to the lawsuit seeking confirmation of invalidation. Therefore, the above argument of

3. Determination on the legality of the disposition

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff was registered as a business entity by stealing the name through ○○ and ○○○○○ and ○○○, but did not actually run ○○○○○ business. On the contrary, the instant disposition, based on the premise that the Plaintiff operated the said business, is unlawful in violation of the principle of substantial taxation, and is null and void as the defect is grave and apparent.

B. Relevant statutes

【National Tax Basic Act

Article 14 (Real Taxation)

(1) If the ownership of the income, profit, property, act or transaction subject to taxation is merely nominal, and there is another person to whom it actually belongs, the tax-related Acts shall apply to such person to whom it actually belongs as a taxpayer.

C. Determination

In order for a taxation disposition to be null and void as a matter of course, the mere fact that there is an illegal ground for the disposition is insufficient, and its defect must be objectively and objectively obvious. In determining whether the defect is significant and obvious, it is necessary to reasonably consider the purpose, significance, function, etc. of the laws and regulations, which form the basis for the pertinent taxation, and at the same time, to reasonably consider the specificity of the specific case itself. A taxation disposition on a person who does not have any legal relation or factual relation (income or act) must be deemed to have a significant and obvious defect. However, in a case where there are objective circumstances that make it possible to believe that the legal relation or factual relation which is not subject to taxation is subject to taxation, which is not subject to taxation, is not subject to taxation, it cannot be deemed to be null and void as a matter of course, even if the defect is serious, if it is apparent that it is apparent that it is subject to taxation, and thus, it cannot be deemed unlawful taxation that misleads the fact of taxation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Meu10682, Nov. 27, 190

Even if the plaintiff fully recognizes the plaintiff's assertion, in light of all circumstances, such as the fact that the plaintiff was registered as the business operator of ○○ Construction Business after April 25, 1997, the issue of whether the plaintiff is a substantial operator of the above business establishment constitutes a case where the plaintiff can be identified as a reason to accurately investigate the facts. Thus, even if the disposition of this case contains a defect as alleged by the plaintiff, it cannot be seen as obvious in appearance. Accordingly, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion

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