Administrative litigation on illegal or wrongful dispositions pursuant to tax-related Acts shall not be filed without undergoing an examination or a request for adjudication.

The Plaintiffs are apparent to have filed the instant lawsuit without going through a procedure to obtain a judgment on the basic factual relations and legal relations from the Commissioner of the National Tax Service or the Tax Tribunal on the instant disposition. This is unlawful as it violates Article 56(2) of the Framework Act

Article 56 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

2012. Revocation of dismissal of request for rectification

AA et al.

Head of tax office

September 13, 2012

November 8, 2012

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

On October 27, 2010, the defendant's rejection decision made on February 17, 2012 against the defendant's request for correction of the notification of the result of the tax investigation conducted on October 27, 2010 against the plaintiff A and the plaintiff BB against the plaintiff AB corporation shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff Company AA (hereinafter referred to as “AA”) is a company with each focus on the development of computer input program and the Plaintiff Company BB (hereinafter referred to as “BB”).

B. The defendant conducted a tax investigation related to trade order against the plaintiffs,

1) On October 27, 2010, Plaintiff A submitted at the first value-added tax return in 2008 and 2009, deemed that part of the total tax invoices submitted by Plaintiff A was delivered as a processing transaction, and notified Plaintiff A of the results of the tax investigation that Plaintiff A would impose a total of KRW 000 and value-added tax amount of KRW 000 (hereinafter referred to as “instant AA investigation notification”) and then on December 31, 2010, the second value-added tax amount of KRW 000 in 2008 and the first value-added tax amount of KRW 00 in 200 in 200, and the first value-added tax amount of KRW 00 in 200 in 208 and the corporate tax amount of KRW 00 in 200 in 208 for the business year of 208.

2) On October 27, 2010, Plaintiff BB issued to Plaintiff BB a notice of the results of tax investigation that it would impose KRW 000 and value-added tax of KRW 000 on the aggregate of KRW 000 and KRW 000 of the corporate tax (hereinafter referred to as “instant BB investigation notice”) by deeming that part of the aggregate of the aggregate of the aggregate of the aggregate of the aggregate of the tax invoices submitted at the first value-added tax return in 2008 and 2009 was delivered as the processing transaction (hereinafter referred to as “the instant BB investigation notice”). On November 30, 2010, Plaintiff B notified the imposition of KRW 200 for the payment period of KRW 208 and KRW 000 for the first year of value-added tax in 200 and KRW 00 for the corporate tax in 209 for the business year of 209

3) Plaintiff ADD’s representative director and Plaintiff BB’s representative director filed a complaint with the prosecution (hereinafter “instant accusation”) on suspicion of non-transaction sales and purchase account receipt.

C. On August 26, 2011, Plaintiff BB’s representative director, CCC was subject to a disposition of no suspicion from the original district prosecutor’s office, and Plaintiff AA’s representative director, CC was acquitted in the case of violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, which became final and conclusive on December 16, 2011.

D. On December 30, 2011, the Plaintiffs filed an application for correction with the Defendant seeking revocation of each of the instant investigation notifications, but the Defendant, on February 17, 2012, issued a dismissal notice (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and the Plaintiffs received the notification on February 22, 2012.

[Ground of Recognition] The non-sured facts, Gap 1, 2, and 3, and Eul 1 through 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. Article 56(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that administrative litigation on illegal and unreasonable dispositions under tax-related Acts cannot be filed without going through a request for examination or adjudgment under the Framework Act on National Taxes, and that lawsuit without going through it is unlawful

B. We examine the instant disposition, and the Plaintiffs’ filing of the instant lawsuit without going through a procedure to obtain judgment on basic facts and legal issues from the Commissioner of the National Tax Service or the Tax Tribunal, is unlawful as it violates Article 56(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

C. As to the above, the plaintiffs asserted that the disposition of this case was already taken by the defendant, and that the disposition of this case cannot be viewed as a procedure corresponding to Article 56 (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it is inappropriate because it does not go through the previous trial procedure.