Violations of the requisite procedure of transfer

On January 31, 2017, 2017, the date of filing the Plaintiff’s tax appeal, is apparent that 90 days have elapsed from February 15, 2015, which was the date of serving a tax payment notice on the instant disposition, and thus, a request for review on the instant disposition is unlawful as filed after the lapse of the period for filing the request.

The contents of the judgment are the same as the attachment.

2017Guhap1651 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

Kim*

AA Head of the Tax Office

December 19, 2017

February 6, 2018

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Cheong-gu Office

Disposition on which the Defendant imposed value-added tax of KRW 13,050,80 on the Plaintiff on February 10, 2015, 2013

The cancellation shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

On February 10, 2015, the Defendant imposed and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 13,050,80 of value-added tax for 2013 on the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and the notice reached the Plaintiff on February 15, 2015.

On January 31, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a tax appeal seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with the Tax Tribunal. However, on May 31, 2017, the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim for tax appeal on the ground that it was filed after the lapse of 90 days from February 15, 2015, the delivery date of the tax payment notice on the instant disposition, and was unlawful.

2. Determination of legality of a lawsuit

A. According to Article 68(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 12848, Dec. 23, 2014; hereinafter the same), a tax appeal shall be filed within 90 days from the date (when a notice of disposition is received, the date of receipt) on which the relevant disposition is known.

B. According to Article 56(2) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes, an administrative litigation against a disposition under tax-related Acts may not be filed without a request for examination or adjudgment and a decision thereon. An administrative litigation seeking a revocation of a disposition is unlawful, unlike the voluntary transfer principle of administrative litigation applicable to general administrative litigation, by which a request for examination or adjudgment under the Framework Act on National Taxes must be filed. In such a case, a request for examination or adjudgment must be lawful. Thus, if a request for examination or adjudgment is unlawful due to the lapse of the filing period, such administrative litigation cannot be deemed as having undergone the necessary transfer procedure under the Framework Act on National Taxes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Nu8091, Jun. 25, 1991).

C. According to the above facts, on January 31, 2017, the Plaintiff’s filing date of the instant disposition, it is apparent that the lapse of 90 days from February 15, 2015, the delivery date of the tax notice on the instant disposition, was 90 days from February 15, 2015, and thus, the request for review on the instant disposition is deemed to have been filed after the lapse of the filing period, and the instant lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant disposition is unlawful as it does not go through

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.