Seoul Administrative Court 201Guhap28295 ( December 16, 2011)

early 2011west 1679 (Law No. 19, 2011)

Since the disposition of this case was revoked, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful as it has no interest in the lawsuit.

Since the defendant revoked ex officio the disposition imposing value-added tax on the statement in the claim that the plaintiff seeks revocation for the first time, the defendant's claim for revocation of the administrative disposition that does not exist and is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit

2012Nu2797 Revocation of the imposition of value-added tax

XX Kim

head of Sung Dong Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2011Guhap28295 decided December 16, 2011

September 4, 2012

September 14, 2012

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 imposition of value-added tax of KRW 000 on September 1, 2010 against the Plaintiff on September 1, 201 shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

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

1. Cancellation of a disposition;

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.

However, according to the evidence Nos. 4 and 5, the defendant can be found to have revoked ex officio the disposition imposing value-added tax as stated in the purport of the claim that the plaintiff seeks revocation, and thus, the lawsuit of this case is seeking revocation of an administrative disposition that does not exist, and thus, it becomes illegal due to lack of legal interest.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is dismissed, and since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed, and the total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant under Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act.