CONTENTS
- 1. How the Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney's Client Came to Seek Assistance
- 2. The Reason the Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney's Client Was Assessed a Penalty Surcharge
- - How the Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney Sought to Revoke the Client's Penalty Surcharge Imposition
- 3. The Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney's Assistance in the Client's Case
- - The Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney Emphasized That the Client's Younger Brother Did Not Cooperate With the Registration
- - The Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney Emphasized That the District Office Was Abusing Its Discretionary Power
- 4. The Result of the Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney's Assistance in the Client's Case
1. How the Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney's Client Came to Seek Assistance
The client explained that they had been unfairly subjected to a penalty surcharge imposition by the head of the district office,
and the account that the Seongnam administrative litigation attorney reviewed was as follows.
The client explained that about ten or so years ago, they purchased a parcel of land from the client's younger brother and then started running a restaurant business on that land.
The client then completed the ownership transfer registration procedure a few months ago, but the district office imposed a penalty surcharge of about 300 million won, claiming that the client was a long-term non-registrant.
The client argued that there was a reason for the delay in the ownership transfer registration procedure and that the penalty surcharge imposed by the district office was unjust.
The client asked the Seongnam administrative litigation attorney to help obtain a judgment revoking that penalty surcharge imposition.
2. The Reason the Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney's Client Was Assessed a Penalty Surcharge
The client was assessed a penalty surcharge of about 300 million won by the district office on the ground that the client was a long-term non-registrant.
Under the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name, if a person does not apply for ownership transfer registration within a certain period, a penalty surcharge is imposed within a range corresponding to 30/100 of the value of the real estate.
Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name, Article 10 (Penalties Against Long-Term Non-Registrants, etc.)
1. If the contracting parties bear mutually reciprocal obligations, the date on which performance of the counter-consideration is effectively completed
2. If only one of the contracting parties bears an obligation, the date on which that contract takes effect
How the Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney Sought to Revoke the Client's Penalty Surcharge Imposition
The Seongnam administrative litigation attorney needed to obtain a judgment revoking the unjust penalty surcharge imposition on the client.
In this case, a 🔗administrative litigation to revoke the penalty surcharge imposition may be filed.
This is because a penalty surcharge imposition is an administrative disposition of a monetary sanction imposed by an administrative agency as a sanction against an act in violation of the law,
so the Seongnam administrative litigation attorney decided to file a lawsuit to revoke the penalty surcharge imposition against the head of the district office who had imposed the penalty surcharge on the client.
3. The Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney's Assistance in the Client's Case
The Seongnam administrative litigation attorney filed the lawsuit to revoke the penalty surcharge imposition and provided assistance as follows.
The Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney Emphasized That the Client's Younger Brother Did Not Cooperate With the Registration
The Seongnam administrative litigation attorney emphasized the point that the client's younger brother did not cooperate with the performance of the registration.
The client was unable to apply for the registration because the younger brother did not cooperate with its performance,
and for this reason the client even filed a lawsuit for ownership transfer registration against the younger brother and obtained a favorable judgment.
In accordance with the judgment in that lawsuit, the client completed the ownership transfer registration, but the district office imposed a penalty surcharge on the ground that the client was a long-term non-registrant.
The Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney Emphasized That the District Office Was Abusing Its Discretionary Power
The Seongnam administrative litigation attorney emphasized the point that the district office that issued the disposition in this case was abusing its discretionary power.
According to Supreme Court Judgment 2005Du3257, where, in performing an administrative act, an agency fails to weigh the interests involved or omits matters that should have been included among the considerations to be weighed, that administrative act is regarded as an unlawful disposition that deviates from and abuses discretionary power.
The Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name provides for the imposition of a penalty surcharge because, in the case of long-term non-registrants, antisocial acts such as tax evasion are induced,
but the prolongation of the client's non-registration was due to a dispute with the younger brother over the purchase price.
The Seongnam administrative litigation attorney argued that this showed that the client had not delayed the registration procedure for purposes such as tax evasion, so the disposition in this case resulted from the district office's abuse of discretionary power and was unlawful.
4. The Result of the Seongnam Administrative Litigation Attorney's Assistance in the Client's Case
As a result of the Seongnam administrative litigation attorney's assistance in the client's case, the client received a judgment revoking the penalty surcharge imposition.
However, the district office appealed, claiming that there had been no unlawfulness in the disposition, so the Seongnam administrative litigation attorney took up the defense against the appeal, and the court issued a judgment dismissing the district office's appeal.
The client had no intent to evade taxes at all but was unfairly at risk of having to pay a large penalty surcharge of 300 million won.
Because the Seongnam administrative litigation attorney took up the assistance on the basis of experience resolving similar cases, the client was able to obtain a judgment revoking the entire imposed penalty surcharge.
If you need assistance with a lawsuit to revoke a penalty surcharge imposition, as in this client's case, please feel free to receive an 🔗attorney referral at any time.
This content is based on actual case studies of Daeryun Law LLC with some adaptations, and the copyright belongs to our firm.
Unauthorized reproduction, duplication, or distribution and other copyright infringements may result in legal action under applicable laws.
