지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The Administrative Litigation Act provides only that a person having legal interests to seek the confirmation of effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a disposition has standing to institute confirmation litigation of nullity in Article 35, but does not provide about the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation of nullity.
The problem on the legal interest of confirmation litigation of nullity of administrative disposition is whether the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation of nullity in civil case should be considered or not. If the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation should be considered, it dosen't permit taxpayers to institute confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition after paying tax. Because civil litigation for refund of tax paid in excess is more direct remedy as compared with confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition. But if the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation should not be considered, it permits taxpayers to institute confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition regardless of the existence of a direct remedy such as civil litigation for refund of tax paid in excess.
Previously the Supreme Court did not permit taxpayers to institute confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition after paying tax. Because civil litigation for refund of tax paid in excess is more direct remedy as litigation to receive tax. But, Recently the Supreme Court have changed the position that the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation of nullity in civil case is not applied to confirmation litigation of nullity of administrative disposition.
In conclusion, it is resonable that the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation of nullity in civil case is not applied to confirmation litigation of nullity of administrative disposition from the aspect of strengthening of remedies for rights, economics legal action, and the difference between administrative litigation and civil litigation. So, taxpayers can institute confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition to receive tax refund in addition to civil litigation.
The problem on the legal interest of confirmation litigation of nullity of administrative disposition is whether the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation of nullity in civil case should be considered or not. If the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation should be considered, it dosen't permit taxpayers to institute confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition after paying tax. Because civil litigation for refund of tax paid in excess is more direct remedy as compared with confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition. But if the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation should not be considered, it permits taxpayers to institute confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition regardless of the existence of a direct remedy such as civil litigation for refund of tax paid in excess.
Previously the Supreme Court did not permit taxpayers to institute confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition after paying tax. Because civil litigation for refund of tax paid in excess is more direct remedy as litigation to receive tax. But, Recently the Supreme Court have changed the position that the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation of nullity in civil case is not applied to confirmation litigation of nullity of administrative disposition.
In conclusion, it is resonable that the supplementary nature of confirmation litigation of nullity in civil case is not applied to confirmation litigation of nullity of administrative disposition from the aspect of strengthening of remedies for rights, economics legal action, and the difference between administrative litigation and civil litigation. So, taxpayers can institute confirmation litigation of nullity of taxation disposition to receive tax refund in addition to civil litigation.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 과세처분의 무효와 무효확인소송
Ⅲ. 민사소송 및 행정소송에서의 소(訴)의 이익
Ⅳ. 무효확인소송에서의 확인의 이익
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (13)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
租稅 및 負擔金의 納付와 賦課處分의 無效確認을 구할 法律上 利益 : 大法院 2008. 3. 20. 宣告 2007두6342 全員合意體判決을 中心으로
공법학연구
2009 .02
-
무효확인소송의 소익 : 행정소송법 제35조 ‘무효확인을 구할 법률상 이익’의 의미
행정법연구
2008 .08
-
당사자소송 - 소송의 형태를 중심으로 -
원광법학
2010 .01
-
客觀訴訟의 법리 - 일본에서의 논의를 중심으로
원광법학
2009 .01
-
공익소송의 입법론적 고찰
원광법학
2013 .01
-
다수당사자의 소송관계
법학논총
2009 .02
-
행정소송에서의 원고적격 : 법원의 조사방법을 중심으로
행정법연구
2009 .12
-
행정소송에서의 기본적 사실관계 동일성의 의의 : 형사소송과의 비교를 중심으로
행정법연구
2016 .08
-
국가기관 간의 분쟁 해결 수단으로서 항고소송의 한계
서강법률논총
2019 .08
-
论中国民事案件诉讼费用预交制度的立法修正
중국법연구
2019 .01
-
행정소송에서의 원고적격 : 기존 4개 학설의 의의를 중심으로
행정법연구
2008 .12
-
중국 민사 사건 소송비용 예납제도의 입법 개정에 관한 연구
중국법연구
2019 .01
-
The Efforts to Reduce Delay in Civil Litigation in Korea
저스티스
1991 .12
-
美國에 있어서의 司法의 公共政策形成
미국헌법연구
2005 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-360-002239910