Whether service by public notice was effective in a timely manner without regard to the service of a tax payment notice which was impossible at the location of the principal office of a company liable for tax payment, to the representative director’s address (negative)

If the tax office served a tax payment notice on a company that is liable for tax payment but was returned as its main office and address were returned due to impossibility of being served, without being served on the domicile recorded on the representative director’s corporate register at the time of service by public notice, such tax payment notice shall not be deemed lawful for the company.

Article 11 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Attorney Kim Jong-jin et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Head of Seodaemun Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu3122 delivered on December 20, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The court below confirmed the fact that the defendant served a tax notice on the non-party 15-5, Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Seoul, the main taxpayer of each tax at the time of Won-gu, the main taxpayer of the tax on the non-party 11-1, Dong-gu, Seoul, the representative director of the non-party company at that time, was returned to the non-party 15-5, the main taxpayer of the tax on the non-party 15-5, whose corporate register was returned, and the non-party 11-dong 13, Dong-gu, Gangnam-gu, the representative director of the non-party company at that time was not considered to have served and served the tax

The judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the incomplete hearing such as the theory of lawsuit.

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 on the bench.

Justices Yoon So-young (Presiding Justice)