logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.06.12 2014가합500963
공탁금출급청구권확인
Text

1. The Korea Electric Power Corporation deposited in gold No. 6459 at the Seoul Central District Court on March 28, 2013 313,000,000 won.

Reasons

Facts of recognition

The Korea Electric Power Corporation shall pay installation subsidies in accordance with the relevant provisions, such as the Electric Utility Act, to customers who install core electric equipment, such as air conditioning equipment (a facility that produces and stores ices or air conditionings using electricity during the night time, but has functioned to use air conditionings during the night time) to be supplied with core electric power, and the Plaintiff is entitled to receive the installation subsidies.

As the Plaintiff did not pay national taxes of KRW 177,536,600 in total, including comprehensive real estate holding tax amounting to KRW 147,947,170 and special rural development tax amounting to KRW 29,589,430, December 15, 2012, Defendant Republic of Korea’s attachment of subsidies claim amounting to KRW 313,00,000, which the Plaintiff had against Korea Electric Power Corporation (hereinafter “instant subsidies claim”) to the extent of the total amount of national taxes in arrears, and notified the Korea Electric Power Corporation thereof.

Defendant Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Jongno-gu”) seized the instant subsidy claim in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Plaintiff did not pay property tax of 302,003,420 on September 30, 2012. On January 2, 2013, KRW 321,931,090, adding additional charges of property tax of 19,927,670 to the said unpaid property tax, and notified the Korea Electric Power Corporation thereof within the scope of the amount in arrears of property tax of this case.

The Korea Electric Power Corporation’s Deposit Deposit Deposit Deposit Deposit Act (hereinafter “Korea Electric Power Corporation”) refers to the Plaintiff’s opinion to the effect that “The seizure of the instant subsidy claims is no effect since the Act on the Management of Subsidies is a subsidy to which the Act on the Management of Subsidies applies.” The Seoul Central District Court on March 28, 2013.

arrow