Late Payment of Stamp Duty After Deadline... Supreme Court "Order to Dismiss Appeal is Lawful"
- Input
- 2025-07-24 16:49:50
- Updated
- 2025-07-24 16:49:50
'Order to Dismiss Appeal' Stamp Duty Correction on the Same Day
Supreme Court "Order is not unlawful even if corrected before service, etc."
Supreme Court "Order is not unlawful even if corrected before service, etc."
[Financial News] The Supreme Court's full bench ruled that even if the stamp duty was paid late after receiving an order to dismiss the appeal for not paying the stamp duty, the order cannot be considered unlawful.
The Supreme Court's full bench (Chief Justice No Tae-ak) overturned the lower court's decision to cancel the first instance order in the immediate appeal case filed by Mr. A against the order to dismiss the appeal and sent the case back to the Incheon District Court.
Mr. A appealed after losing the first instance in a civil lawsuit but did not attach the stamp duty to the appeal. The court issued a correction order to "pay the stamp duty and service fee within 5 days from the date of delivery of the correction order."
The court issued an order to dismiss the appeal due to non-correction of the stamp duty as Mr. A did not pay the stamp duty and service fee by the expiration of the correction period. On the same day, Mr. A paid the stamp duty and service fee and filed an immediate appeal, claiming the dismissal order was unjust.
The lower court accepted Mr. A's claim. The court judged, "Since Mr. A paid a considerable amount of the stamp duty on the same day as the issuance of the order to dismiss the appeal and before the order was delivered, the correction effect occurred, making the dismissal order unlawful."
However, the Supreme Court overturned this judgment, stating, "After the order to dismiss the appeal is established, even if the appellant corrects the stamp duty, the dismissal order does not become unlawful unless there are special circumstances." It was deemed that the correction effect of the stamp duty cannot be recognized even if corrected before the effect of service, etc., occurs after the order to dismiss the appeal is established.
The Supreme Court pointed out, "The lower court should have clarified the chronological order of when the order to dismiss the appeal was established and when the defendant paid the stamp duty to determine the lawfulness of the order to dismiss the appeal."
jisseo@fnnews.com Seo Minji Reporter