Jeju District Court 2009Guhap908 ( December 01, 2010)

Disposition to attach trust real estate on the grounds that the truster's default is illegal;

(As in the judgment of the first instance court, the value-added tax in arrears by the truster cannot be deemed as the right that occurred in the course of the trust affairs, and thus a disposition that seizes the trustee's real estate is unlawful.

(State) the invalidity of attachment disposition 2010Nu469

쇠 Real Estate Trust Co., Ltd.

○ Head of tax office

Jeju District Court Decision 2009Guhap908 Decided December 1, 2010

June 1, 2011

June 15, 2011

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

On September 22, 2009, the defendant confirmed that the seizure disposition on each real estate listed in the separate sheet against the plaintiff on September 22, 2009 is invalid.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Issues and determination of the instant case

The defendant seized each real estate listed in the separate sheet that was trusted by the non-party company to the plaintiff on the ground that BBB (hereinafter "the non-party company") was delinquent in value-added tax, and Article 21 (1) of the Trust Act provides that "the trust property shall not be subject to compulsory execution or auction: Provided, That this shall not apply in the case of the right arising from the preceding trust or the right arising from the performance of trust affairs, except in the case of the right arising from the preceding trust, the non-party company's default of value-added tax constitutes "the right arising from the performance of trust affairs" under Article 21 (1) of the Trust Act." For this reason, the first instance court determined that the meaning of "the right arising from the performance of trust affairs" under Article 21 (1) of the Trust Act refers to the claim arising from the ordinary business activity of the trustee, such as the management or disposition of trust property, and therefore, the non-party company, the truster, is not subject to value-added tax.

In light of the reasoning of this court's argument, even if the defendant's supplemental arguments were considered in the trial, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and it cannot be said that there was an error as alleged by the defendant.

2. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

Since the court's reasoning of this case, other than the conclusion, is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the court shall accept the remainder as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.