Seoul High Court 2010Nu14482 ( October 19, 2010)

(A) The effect of seizure shall be valid even if the details or amount of the seized claim is somewhat different.

(Main) Even if there are somewhat differences from the details presented as preserved claims at the time of notification of the attachment of property, the effect of attachment cannot be denied unless there are most of the preserved claims subject to attachment or different essential contents, in light of the fact that the specific details or amount of the seized claims is not registered.

2010Du26490 Registration of cancellation of real estate seizure

United StatesA

Plaintiff Intervenor, Appellant

eB

○ Head of tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2010Nu14482 Decided October 19, 2010

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff and the supplementary intervenor.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but their arguments on the grounds of appeal by each appellant are clear that they fall under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal and therefore, all of the appeals are dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by

Reference materials.

If the grounds of final appeal are not included in the grounds of final appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of trial without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal, and refers to the system of dismissal of final appeal by judgment without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal (see this case, e.g.,