logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.06.28 2018구합54187
출국금지기간연장처분 취소 청구의 소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. As of April 2017, the Plaintiff is in arrears with a total of KRW 1,124,087,140 (including each additional charge) of value-added tax, capital gains tax, and global income tax.

B. On May 4, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to prohibit the Plaintiff from departing from May 4, 2016 to November 3, 2016, based on Article 4(1)4 of the Immigration Control Act. The Defendant issued a disposition to extend the period of prohibition against the Plaintiff from May 4, 2016 to November 3, 2016 pursuant to Article 4-2 of the Immigration Control Act, and to extend the period of prohibition against the Plaintiff from May 4, 2018 to October 31, 2018.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 25, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant disposition was unlawful on the following grounds

1) In light of the Plaintiff’s circumstances of tax delinquency, regardless of the Plaintiff’s interest, the transfer income tax was generated or occurred in the course of collecting taxes against the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff’s absence of property to pay taxes, etc., the Plaintiff’s disposition of this case is unlawful by deviating from and abusing discretionary authority, in light of the following: (a) it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff failed to pay taxes without justifiable grounds; (b) the tax authority did not reveal that the Plaintiff had property owned by the Plaintiff in addition to the property attached to the Plaintiff; (c) the Plaintiff did not have any property that the Plaintiff would escape from Korea; and (d) there were circumstances considering the fact that the Plaintiff did not have any property that the Plaintiff would escape from Korea; and (d) the Plaintiff is responsible for business

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Facts of recognition 1) The Plaintiff’s delinquency, etc. are as follows. The date of transfer (the date of reversion) of the kinds of property subject to tax items.

arrow