Whether collection of seized claims is legitimate or not.

The delinquent taxpayer lent one billion won to the defendant, and the plaintiff has the right to collect the delinquent taxpayer's delinquent national taxes in subrogation of the delinquent taxpayer, which is within the additional limit on the delinquent local taxes, and the delinquent taxpayer has the right to collect all the loan claims of one billion won in subrogation of the delinquent taxpayer.

Article 41 (Procedures for Attachment of Claims)

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. In accordance with the claims extended at the trial of the plaintiff, the defendant will pay additional KRW 602,041,980 to the plaintiff.

3. The costs of appeal including the costs arising from claims extended in the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant paid KRW 1 billion to the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 397,958,020 from the first instance court to the Plaintiff, and extended the purport of the claim as above in the first instance trial).

2. Purport of appeal

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

1. Facts of recognition;

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or can be acknowledged by taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings in each entry of Gap evidence 1-2, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 12, 16-1 through 4, 11-1, 13-2, 23, 14, and 15-2, and the testimony of Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5 and ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○’s witness evidence Nos. 3, 12, and 13, and there is no counter-proof otherwise.

A. On February 27, 2002, ○○○○ Company’s non-listed shares, which was owned by ○○○○○ Company (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) sold KRW 1,000,000,000 to ○○○ Company’s ○○ Company’s non-listed shares, and received the said money through the Korea Exchange Bank’s account under one’s own name. On the same day, the Defendant, the representative director of the Nonparty Company, lent KRW 1,00,000,000 to ○○ Company’s Defendant (hereinafter “instant loan claim”). The said money was deposited through the said bank account of the Nonparty Company, and the said amount was accounted as the Defendant’s temporary receipt on the same day.

B. On June 21, 2002, the director of the ○○ Tax Office under his control of the Plaintiff attached the part equivalent to the money out of the loan claims of this case against the Defendant of the ○○○○○ on March 1, 2002 due to the disposition on default on the tax amount of KRW 134,87,180 due to the occasional amount of capital gains tax, etc. on March 21, 2002. On September 2, 2002, the part equivalent to the above money out of the loan claims of this case related to the disposition on default on the tax amount of KRW 178,481,670 due to the disposition on default on the tax amount of capital gains tax, etc. on July 2, 2002, and notified ○○ and the Defendant

C. On January 27, 2004, the director of the △△△ Tax Office under the Plaintiff-affiliated Tax Office attached the portion equivalent to the above money out of the loan bonds of this case to the 631,667,490 won in arrears, such as occasional capital gains tax on December 27, 2003 and notified the ○○ and the Defendant of the attachment.

D. As of February 8, 2006, with respect to the instant loan claim, the total amount of the tax in arrears by ○○○○, which was notified to the Defendant as of December 8, 2006, is KRW 1,274,49,510 (the increased additional tax amount of KRW 196,738,210 from time to time on March 2002 + + KRW 262,113,060 from time to time on July 2002 + KRW 815,648,240 from time to time on December 203).

2. Determination

According to the above facts, ○○○ lent KRW 1 billion to the Defendant on February 27, 2002, and the Plaintiff shall have the right to collect the whole amount of the instant loan claim, which is within the limit of ○○’s national tax in arrears and the additional dues, in subrogation of ○○○ through the above attachment notification pursuant to Article 41 of the National Tax Collection Act, by subrogation of ○○○, pursuant to Article 41 of the National Tax Collection Act. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the above KRW 1 billion to the

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim, including the claim extended in the trial room, shall be accepted in its entirety due to the reasons, and the defendant's appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and it shall be ordered to additionally pay KRW 602,041,980 upon the plaintiff's extended claim in the trial room. It is so decided as per Disposition.

* Reference Materials

Seoul Central District Court (2003Gahap75386) ( October 19, 2004)

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 397,958,020.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Determination on the cause of the claim

In full view of Gap 1-1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, and 11-1 through 4, A 12, A 13-1, 2, and 3 of each of the above statements and arguments on February 27, 2002, ○○○○ (hereinafter referred to as the "non-party company") sold 1,00 billion won to ○○○○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the non-party company") for 1,00,000 won and deposited the above amount through the Korea Exchange Bank account in its name. The ○○○○ was the defendant, who is the representative director of the non-party company, 1,00,000 won of the above loan 2,000 won of the above 7,000 won of the loan 9,000 won of the loan 2,000 won of the above 7,000 won of the loan 2,000 won of the transfer income tax on the non-party company's 28.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be accepted on the grounds of its reasoning, and it is so decided as per Disposition.