1. The Defendant imposed a resident tax of KRW 1,044,030,710 on the Plaintiff on August 7, 2009.

1. Basic facts

A. On August 7, 2009, the Director of the Korea-style Tax Office imposed and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 10,437,701,270 of the global income tax for the year 2006, along with the resident tax 1,04,030,170 calculated based on the global income tax base pursuant to Article 177-4(2) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 8864, Feb. 29, 2008; hereinafter the same), and notified the Defendant of the details thereof.

B. On August 7, 2009, the Director of the Jongno Tax Office served a notice for payment of global income tax and the notice for payment of resident tax of this case by registered mail to the Plaintiff, but such notice was returned on August 13, 2009.

Upon the return of each of the above notice for payment of global income tax on August 25, 2009, the Korea Tax Office withdrawn the decision to impose the global income tax in accordance with Article 16 of the National Tax Collection Act.

However, the Director of the Young Tax Office did not notify the defendant of this fact.

C. The Defendant did not pay the instant resident tax by August 31, 2009, which was the due date for payment. On October 16, 2009, the Defendant urged the Plaintiff to pay KRW 1,087,879,90, including the surcharge, but notified the Plaintiff on October 16, 209 of the demand notice, but the demand notice was returned to the address unknown, and served by public notice on November 5, 2009.

On September 2, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Tax Tribunal for the confirmation of invalidity of the disposition imposing the resident tax of this case. However, on December 11, 2014, the Tax Tribunal rejected the request on the ground that the Plaintiff’s request for adjudication is unlawful on the grounds that the request period expires.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6 (including additional numbers), Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. Since the plaintiff's assertion or the defendant or the plaintiff's allegation was not lawfully served on the plaintiff with the notice for payment of the resident tax of this case, the disposition of imposition of resident tax of this case

B. Article 25 of the former Local Tax Act is to collect local taxes.