Gwangju District Court-2017-Gu Partnership-1223 (Law No. 16, 2018)

Cho-2017-B-0549 (No. 11, 2017)

When calculating the retirement income tax on the special retirement allowances of this case, the number of years of service should be calculated from the date of the initial entry rather than the date of full-time conversion.

Considering the fact that the total number of years of service before and after the full-time conversion is at least 10 years and that the same business was performed at the same place without the suspension of business, the period before the full-time conversion should be included in the income deduction for the special retirement allowance.

Article 48 of the Income Tax Act, Article 105 of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act

Gwangju High Court-2018-Nu-5450 ( October 10, 2019)

Is 00

00. Head of tax office

2019.09.05

o October 10, 2019

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant's rejection disposition against the plaintiff on October 6, 2016 shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Reasons for the disposition, and the plaintiff's assertion;

The court's explanation on this part is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it refers to Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Whether the lawsuit in this case is lawful

When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Du16879, Apr. 29, 2010).

If the purport of the entire argument in the statement Nos. 10-1 and 2 of the evidence Nos. 10-2 is added, the defendant revoked the disposition of this case on July 30, 2019, and then rendered a decision of correction to refund the retirement income tax of KRW 15,564,606 to the plaintiff. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is against an administrative disposition no longer exists because it loses its validity, and thus becomes illegal as there is no interest in the lawsuit.

4. Conclusion

Thus, since the lawsuit of this case was unlawful for the first time in this court, the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed, but it is so decided as per Disposition by the defendant under Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act as to the burden of litigation costs