logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1983. 12. 13. 선고 83누12 판결
[법인세부과처분취소][집31(6)특,151;공1984.2.1.(721) 193]
Main Issues

Whether a decision on taxable income subject to corporate tax is an administrative disposition subject to appeal litigation (negative)

Summary of Judgment

The decision of taxable income subject to corporate tax is a prior decision prior to the disposition of tax imposition, which does not take effect immediately, and if there is no way to dispute the disposition of tax imposition at the time of the subsequent decision, the above decision shall not be deemed an administrative disposition subject to appeal, even if there is no such special circumstance.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 37 of the Corporate Tax Act, Article 99 of the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act, Article 1 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 77Nu70 delivered on September 28, 1977, 74Nu257 delivered on May 27, 1975, and 77Nu89 delivered on February 4, 1978

Plaintiff-Appellant

Attorney Park Jin Construction Industry Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Defendant-Appellee

Head of Yeongdeungpo Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 81Gu559 delivered on December 6, 1982

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

The Plaintiff’s attorney’s ground of appeal is examined.

In the judgment of the court below, the decision of taxable income of this case was made prior to the disposition of tax imposition, which does not take effect immediately, and if there is no way to dispute the disposition of tax imposition at the time of the subsequent disposition of tax imposition, the above decision cannot be viewed as an administrative disposition immediately subject to appeal litigation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 74Nu257, May 27, 1975; 77Nu70, Sept. 28, 197; 77Nu89, Feb. 4, 1978; 77Nu89, Feb. 4, 1978). The court below's decision which rejected the lawsuit of this case as unlawful, is just, and there is no error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the disposition of tax imposition like the theory of tax imposition. The appeal, which is groundless, is dismissed, and the costs of appeal shall be assessed against the plaintiff against the judge as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices O Sung-sung(Presiding Justice)

arrow