Penalty Notice Sent via 'KakaoTalk' to Overseas Resident... Court Rules "Service Invalid"

The court ruled that sending a penalty notice to overseas residents to the administrative management address at the community service center and delivering related information via KakaoTalk message without prior application is not a lawful delivery procedure and is therefore invalid.

Seoul Administrative Court.

According to the legal community on the 18th, Judge Seo Kyung-min of the Administrative Division 4 at the Seoul Administrative Court ruled in favor of plaintiff A in a lawsuit seeking cancellation of a penalty imposition filed against the Yeongdeungpo District Office.

In July 2020, Yeongdeungpo District Office imposed a penalty of about 62 million won on A for violating the Real Name Real Estate Act related to nominal trust registration. However, since A was residing overseas at the time, the disposition document was delivered to a community service center in Seongdong-gu, Seoul, which A had registered as the 'administrative management address.' The document was received by a community service center employee on the 28th of the same month.

A only became aware of the penalty imposition after receiving a KakaoTalk message from a Yeongdeungpo District Office employee in August last year, instructing him to pay the penalty. He also received a photo of a delinquency notice cover for 6 million won, taken and scanned via KakaoTalk message.

Accordingly, A filed a lawsuit claiming the disposition was invalid as it was not lawfully notified to him. On the other hand, Yeongdeungpo District Office argued that it could not control who received the document at the delivery location and that it had no legal obligation to deliver the documents directly to A.

The court ruled in favor of A. The bench judged that delivering the disposition document to the community service center was not lawful. The court stated, "According to Article 28 of the Local Tax Basic Act, the address designated for document delivery is the place of residence," and added, "The community service center was registered as the administrative management address due to overseas residence, but it cannot be considered a place of residence."

Furthermore, the court held, "Yeongdeungpo District Office could have easily confirmed that A was residing overseas and could have delivered the documents to the overseas address or, if that was difficult, could have used public notice delivery."

It concluded, "Receiving only a KakaoTalk message cannot be considered a lawful electronic delivery method requested by A for notification of this disposition," and "Since the disposition was not lawfully notified to A, it did not take effect and is therefore invalid."