A. The meaning of "where the decision is not notified" under the proviso of Article 61 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes

B. Whether the procedure of the previous trial is subject to ex officio investigation (affirmative)

A. "Where the decision was not notified" under the proviso of Article 61 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes means where the decision was not received within the decision period. Thus, in this case where the decision to dismiss the plaintiff's objection was notified to the plaintiff after 30 days of the decision period, the plaintiff's decision to dismiss the objection should have been made within the peremptory period of 60 days starting from the expiration of the decision period in accordance with the proviso of Article 60 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, regardless of the additional contents, because the plaintiff was not notified of the decision period, and thus, the defendant (the director of the tax office) can make a request for review within 60 days from the receipt of the decision period in accordance with the provision of Article 60 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, the request for review can not be legitimate even if the plaintiff received the decision within 60 days from the receipt of the decision period according to the additional contents.

B. Whether the pre-trial procedure, which is the premise of the administrative litigation, has been lawfully followed is a matter to be investigated by the court ex officio, regardless of the parties’ assertion.

(a) Article 61(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes;

[Judgment of the court below]

The superintendent of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 81Gu40 delivered on December 1, 1981

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

According to the proviso of Article 61 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, when a request for review is to be made after filing an objection, it shall be made within 60 days from the date when the decision was notified under Article 66 (4) of the Act, and if the decision was not notified, within 60 days from the expiration of the period for decision-making (30 days pursuant to the proviso of Article 6 (5) of the Act and Article 65 (2) which is applicable mutatis mutandis under the main sentence of Article 66 (5) of the Act), and Article 61 (2) of the same Act shall be a peremptory term for the above request for review. The term "if the decision is not notified," shall be within 30 days from the date of receipt of the decision-making request for review which is applicable mutatis mutandis under Article 66 (5) of the Act (Article 66 (2) of the same Act). Since the decision-making request for review cannot be made lawfully within the period for decision-making after the expiration of 60 days from the date of the decision-making request for review, the plaintiff cannot be notified.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice)