logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울행정법원 2018.05.03 2017구합87289
출국금지처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 31, 2009, the Plaintiff was delinquent in paying KRW 10,706,00,00 for value-added tax, which is the date of payment, and on June 21, 2017, in total, KRW 200,749,00 for value-added tax and global income tax (including surcharges) as of June 21, 2017.

B. Pursuant to Article 4(1)4 of the Immigration Control Act and Article 1-3(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the Defendant prohibited the Plaintiff from departing from the Republic of Korea from July 31, 2014 to January 30, 2015 on the ground that national taxes are delinquent, and issued a disposition extending the prohibition of departure four times in total from January 16, 2017, when the period for prohibition of departure against the Plaintiff was extended until July 31, 2015.

C. The Plaintiff was issued a new passport from March 9, 2017 to March 9, 2027, whose term of validity expired on January 16, 2017.

The Commissioner of the National Tax Service requested the Defendant to prohibit departure on November 2017. On December 1, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition to prohibit departure (hereinafter “instant disposition”) against the Plaintiff from December 1, 2017 to May 28, 2018 on the ground that the Plaintiff did not pay national taxes.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) As the Plaintiff did not notify in writing of the instant disposition, the instant disposition is procedural error. 2) The Defendant rendered the instant disposition based on the Commissioner of the National Tax Service’s request for prohibition of departure to November 2017 pursuant to Article 7-4(1) of the National Tax Collection Act and Article 10-5(1) and (2)5 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. The Plaintiff’s request for prohibition of departure does not amount to KRW 50,000,000,000 for the last one year from November 201 to November 2017. As such, the amount of national taxes newly incurred during the foregoing period does not amount to KRW 5,00,000,000,000 for the Republic of Korea, etc. for justifiable reasons for the purpose

arrow