Where the tax authority did not notify the taxpayer of the determination of the small amount of tax in accordance with the determination of the National Tax Tribunal, the taxation disposition subject to the revocation lawsuit (=disposition prior to the correction)

According to the decision of the National Tax Tribunal, if the tax authority has determined to revise the amount of tax internally, but has not yet notified the taxpayer of the decision, the object of the tax disposition is the initial disposition prior to the reorganization.

Article 19 of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 80 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Kim Jae-re et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

Head of Seocho Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu3498 delivered on July 12, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

If the tax authority decided to revise the amount of tax internally according to the decision of the National Tax Tribunal, but did not notify the taxpayer of the decision, the object of the disposition to revoke the imposition is the first disposition to revoke the tax before the reorganization (Supreme Court Decision 83Nu438 delivered on November 27, 1984).

Therefore, the lower court notified the Plaintiff of the imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 796,93,029, KRW 159,39,618,618 as to the transaction of the Plaintiff’s land in this case. After that, the lower court decided to correct the amount of capital gains tax of KRW 225,316,344, Defendant’s defense tax of KRW 45,063,268 according to the decision of reduction of national tax appeal due to the Plaintiff’s objection, but did not notify the Plaintiff of the above decision of correction. The lower court, based on the initial disposition of revocation, was justifiable.

It is true that the defendant's receipt of the plaintiff by notifying the refund of the theory was not asserted in the court below. Therefore, it is unreasonable to argue in the opposite position.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)