Incheon District Court 2015-Gu 52832 (Law No. 11, 2016)

As the Plaintiff constitutes a beneficial shareholder of the Nonparty Company, the disposition of seizure of the Plaintiff’s real estate owned by the second taxpayer is lawful.

(1) It is difficult to view that the Plaintiff, regardless of the operation of the non-party company, was registered as a shareholder in the register of shareholders only in the form of the non-party company, and there is room to view that the Plaintiff is in a position or actually exercising the right to the instant shares.

Article 39 (Secondary Liability for Tax Payment of Contributors)

2016Nu63578 Revocation of attachment disposition

Plaintiff (Appellants et al.)

AA

Defendant (Appellants and Appellants)

OO Head of the tax office

Incheon District Court Decision 2015Guhap52832 Decided August 11, 2016

2017.02.01

2017.03.08

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The attachment disposition taken by the defendant on October 23, 2014 against real estate listed in the attached Table 1 shall be revoked.

The grounds for the Plaintiff’s assertion in the trial while filing an appeal do not differ significantly from the contents of the Plaintiff’s assertion in the first instance trial, and even if each of the evidence submitted in the first instance trial is examined in entirety, the first instance court’s determination rejecting the Plaintiff’s assertion is justifiable. The grounds for the court’s explanation on this case are the same as the reasons for the first instance judgment, and thus, it cited it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.