beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul Administrative Court-2015-Gu Partnership-56922 ( October 29, 2015)
Title
2 The second notification is nothing more than reducing the amount of tax notified by the first notification, so it is not subject to appeal litigation separately.
Summary
(The same as the judgment of the first instance court) If the first notification becomes final and conclusive, a lawsuit seeking nullification and revocation of the portion exceeding the increased increased increased increased increased by the second notification is unlawful, and the legality of the notification for increased increased additional dues, which is a collection disposition, cannot be asserted on the ground of defects in the principal tax.
Related statutes
Article 24 (Succession of Tax Liability due to Inheritance)
Cases
2015Nu69012 Requests for the nullification of a disposition of designation as joint and several taxpayers
Plaintiff and appellant
1. 00 AA2. AB
Defendant, Appellant
O Head of tax office
Judgment of the first instance court
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2015Guhap56922 decided October 29, 2015
Conclusion of Pleadings
September 1, 2016
Imposition of Judgment
October 6, 2016
Text
1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The judgment of the first instance court is revoked. The collection disposition of each capital gains tax of KRW 000 (including additional charges and increased additional charges) rendered by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs on February 6, 2014 is confirmed to be invalid. Preliminaryly, the collection disposition of each capital gains tax of KRW 000 (including additional charges and increased additional charges) made by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs on February 6, 2014 is revoked.
Reasons
1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding "(the same shall also apply even if the statement of evidence No. 11 submitted by the court of first instance is added to "(the same shall also apply to the statement of evidence No. 11)" after the judgment of the court of first instance No. 4. 16.
2. Conclusion
Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed in entirety due to the lack of grounds.