Where a taxation disposition that misleads the factual basis becomes invalid;

Even if a tax authority imposed a tax by misunderstanding the fact that taxable income exists on the basis of wrong taxation data even if there is no taxable income, if it is evident that the taxation data, which served as the basis for misunderstanding of the fact, lacks the appearance of the taxation data, or cannot be objectively recognized as the establishment or authenticity of the taxation data, such taxation disposition by admitting the taxable income based only on such taxation data, is serious, as well as that by objectively apparent and apparent.

Article 2 of the Administrative Litigation Act

Supreme Court Decision 84Nu250 Decided November 12, 1985 84Nu346 Decided November 12, 1985

[Judgment of the court below]

The Head of the Maternization Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 80Gu442 delivered on June 29, 1984

The part of the judgment below on the ancillary claim is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The remaining appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal dismissed shall be assessed against the plaintiff.

1. We examine the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 3 as to the conjunctive claim by the Plaintiff’s attorney.

(1) In its reasoning, the Plaintiff was the shareholder of the 4 textbook companies, such as the Non-Party Korean Textbook Company. Since the National Tax Service’s investigation team conducted a tax investigation on the above 4 companies around February 1977, it revealed that the omitted amount of sales from January 1, 1972 to the upper half of 1977 was KRW 8,711,942,531, and it imposed corporate tax and corporate tax on each company by including the estimated earnings, and it is deemed that the amount was distributed to the shareholders of 4 companies each year according to the share ratio, and then the tax authority determined that the amount of taxable income would have been distributed each year as dividends, bonus, etc. according to the share ratio, and thus, the Plaintiff’s disposition of calculating the amount of income belonging to each shareholder, including the Plaintiff, was made final and conclusive, and that the Plaintiff would be subject to strong taxation or criminal charges for the shareholders, even though there was no other tax base for the 197-year dividend income and the grounds for invalidation.

(2) The disposition is deemed null and void only when the inherent defect in the administrative disposition is serious and objectively apparent. As such, in a case where the tax authority made a tax disposition by misunderstanding the factual basis as to taxable income based on wrong taxation data even without any taxable income, the mistake of factual basis based on such erroneous taxation data would be limited to cases where it is objectively unclear, and thus it is difficult to deem it null and void abrupt. However, in a case where it is apparent that the taxation data, which is the basis of mistake of factual basis, lacks the external form and form, or it is impossible to objectively establish it or prove its authenticity, the taxation disposition by admitting the taxable income based solely on such taxation data should be deemed null and void abruptive and objectively apparent. This legal principle is not only because some of the taxable income recognized by the tax authority in the disposition of global income tax, but also because there is no reason to regard it as legitimate, and there is no reason to regard it as a different case from the other taxable income, and thus, it should be deemed null and void abruptive disposition as to such part of the global income tax.

According to the records, if the National Tax Service organized a union investigation team for four companies, including the non-party Korea Textbook and the non-party Korea Textbook, and conducted a tax investigation, the above four companies' related books were confiscated by investigation agencies and 30 or more officers and employees were arrested or detained by investigation agencies, etc., and the above union investigation team concluded that the total amount of 8,711,942,531 won was attributed to each of the above four companies' business years after the investigation and investigation was added to gross income or dividends, without any specific reasonable and reasonable grounds, it was concluded that the amount was reverted to each of the shareholders as bonus or dividends. Accordingly, the court below prepared a list of shareholders' income amount and withholding taxes for each of the above companies without any specific reasons, and prepared and submitted the list of global income tax base and withholding taxes for each of the above companies without any specific reasons. Accordingly, the plaintiff's report and submission of tax base and submission of tax assessment data for each of the above companies cannot be deemed to be reasonable and reasonable. If it fails to comply with this, the plaintiff prepared and submission of the above list of global income tax to the company.

(3) Although the defect inherent in the particulars and disposition of the instant global income was as above, it was merely a mere reason for revocation due to the error in the calculation of the tax base, and thus rejected the conjunctive claim without considering the Plaintiff’s assertion, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the invalidation of taxation disposition and by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and thereby adversely affected the judgment. Therefore, the part concerning the conjunctive claim among the judgment of the court below as to the conjunctive claim cannot be reversed without any need to be examined in the judgment on other grounds of appeal.

2. The plaintiff filed an appeal against the entire judgment of the court below, but the part which dismissed the main claim on the ground of the lapse of the period for filing the appeal is without merit. Therefore, this part of the appeal is without merit.

3. Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below concerning the conjunctive claim is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below, and the remaining grounds of appeal by the plaintiff are without merit. The costs of appeal to the court below are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by

Justices Yoon Il-young (Presiding Justice) Gangwon-young Kim Young-ju