Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap15092 ( February 6, 2015)

The designation of the person liable for secondary tax payment of this case is not invalid.

(See the judgment of the court of first instance) Inasmuch as the legal relations or facts subject to taxation are accurately examined and the substance is not revealed, there were objective circumstances that could mislead the Plaintiff, not the actual owner, so even if the tax authority imposed a tax disposition on the Plaintiff, which is not the actual owner, the defect cannot be seen as apparent, and thus does not constitute invalid.

Article 39 (Secondary Liability to Pay Taxes by Investor)

2015Nu38063 Revocation of revocation of designation as a person liable for secondary tax payment.

IsaA

Head of the Eastern Tax Office and one other

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2014Guhap15092 decided February 6, 2015

November 19, 2015

December 10, 2015

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

The part of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the Defendants’ respective imposition shall be revoked.

On August 3, 2007, the imposition of global income tax of KRW 50,690,540, additional dues of KRW 1,520,710, increased additional dues of KRW 608,280, which was imposed on the Plaintiff on the Plaintiff on August 3, 2005, and the imposition of KRW 5,040,60, additional dues of KRW 151,210, which was imposed by the head of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on the Plaintiff on August 3, 2007, respectively.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this court's explanation are as follows, except for the dismissal of part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows, from 12 to 10 of the judgment of the court of second instance, and from 12 and 13 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

Place of height shall be the same place.

��제3쪽 제2행부터 표 아래 제2행까지 부분을 삭제한다.

��제3쪽 표 아래 제3행의 "다."를 "나."로 고친다.

��제3쪽 표 아래 제5행의 "피고 도봉세무서장"을 "제1심 공동피고 도봉세무서장(이하'도봉세무서장'이라 한다)"로 고친다.

��제3쪽 표 아래 제7행의 "피고 도봉세무서장"을 "도봉세무서장"으로 고친다.

��제4쪽 제4행의 "라."를 "다."로 고친다.

��제4쪽 제8, 9행의 "갑 제1, 2, 7, 8, 9호증"을 "갑 제7 내지 9호증"으로, "을가 제1내지 6, 13 내지 18호증(가지번호 포함)"을 "을가 제15 내지 18호증"으로 각 고친다.

��제5쪽 제3행의 "갑 제1, 8, 9호증, 을가 제2호증의 1 내지 9"를 "갑 제8, 9호증"으로 고친다.

��제5쪽 제4행 내지 6행의 "피고 도봉세무서장은 제2차 납세의무자지정 및 통지 당시 별지 목록 기재와 같이 부가가치세 등에 대한 납부기한 경과에 따른 가산금과 중가산금을 함께 고지한 사실,"을 삭제한다.

��제5쪽 제12, 13행의 "① 피고 도봉세무서장에 대한 가산금과 중가산금의 각 부과처분 무효확인청구,"를 삭제한다.

��제5쪽 제13, 14행의 "②"를 "①"로, "③"을 "②"로 각 고친다.

��제5쪽 제18행부터 제6쪽 제3행까지를 삭제한다.

��제6쪽 제4행의 "(2)"를 "(1)"로, 제19행의 "(3)"을 "(2)"로 각 고친다.

��제8쪽 제6행부터 제9쪽 제1행까지를 삭제한다.

��제9쪽 제2행의 "(3)"을 "(2)"로 제10쪽 제1행의 "(4)"를 "(3)"으로 각 고친다.

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit.