Daejeon District Court-2015-Gu Partnership-146 (Law No. 18, 2016)

If a lawsuit is brought without going through the procedure of the previous trial, that action shall be dismissed.

(The judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the judgment of the court of first instance). Even after the filing of a lawsuit, the lawsuit was filed only to the defendant and did not make a request for examination or adjudgment pursuant to the Framework Act on National Taxes within 90 days after the notice of dismissal of the lawsuit was made.

Articles 56(2) and 55(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes

2016Nu11290 Revocation of the decision of rectification of taxation

00

00. Head of tax office

Daejeon District Court 2015Guhap146 ( May 18, 2016)

August 25, 2016

September 8, 2016

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The decision of the first instance shall be revoked. The decision of the defendant on March 23, 2015 against the plaintiff shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons why the court should explain the instant case are added to the following parts of the judgment.

Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of

This shall be cited by the main sentence.

2. The decision on addition (the decision on the plaintiff's assertion of addition to the trial)

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) Prior to filing an administrative litigation on a disposition imposing national taxes, a request for examination or a trial as a procedure of the preceding trial.

Article 56(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes that provides that a request for sale must be made must be made;

Since Article 107(3) of the Constitution does not apply mutatis mutandis to the procedure of law, not only the violation but also the judgment of the people.

Article 27 (1) of the Constitution is also violated because it infringes on the right to claim.

Even if it does not exist, the administrative litigation may be instituted lawfully (i).

2) After filing the instant lawsuit, the Plaintiff raised an objection to the Defendant’s side, and such objection raised.

independent national tax judges beyond the defendant's influence; and

A request for review is considered to have been decided following the review by the National Tax Examination Committee (B).

B. Determination

1) As to the argument

The Framework Act on National Taxes shall apply mutatis mutandis to administrative appeals under Article 107 of the Constitution.

Requests for examination of general administrative dispositions or for examination of local taxes under paragraph (3) of this Article;

In the case of national taxes, a National Tax Examination Committee or a National Tax Examination Committee of a certain level independently and independently

There is a basis to ensure the objectivity and fairness of the decision by requiring deliberation.

In addition, even if a request for a trial on national tax is examined and decided, it cannot be deemed that demanding a necessary transfer procedure prior to filing an administrative litigation on a disposition imposing national tax violates Article 107(3) of the Constitution or Article 27(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s above assertion on a different premise is not acceptable.

2) As to the argument

Article 56 (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes is clearly divided into an objection filing, a request for examination or a request for judgment (Article 66) and Article 56 (2) of the same Act

In light of the fact that 'request for examination or adjudgment' and 'decision thereon' are clearly provided that administrative litigation cannot be initiated unless they undergo 'request for examination or adjudgment', 'request for examination or adjudgment' cannot be presented as the same as the request for examination under the Framework Act on National Taxes, and eventually, the above assertion by the first

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed in an unlawful manner, and the judgment of the court of first instance is delivered with this conclusion.

Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.