(b) Whether the tax authorities may refund the corresponding liquor tax, etc., where the actual quantity of alcoholic beverages for which delivery is deemed is made is reduced or exempted after the liquor tax is paid for such alcoholic beverages;

B. Therefore, even if the manufacturer fails to recover the amount of liquor tax imposed by the manufacturer by taking a procedure for exemption from liquor tax pursuant to the provisions of Article 28 of the Liquor Tax Act, etc. because the liquor tax, etc. is partially decided on the manufacturing process, etc. of alcoholic beverages which were deemed to have been shipped out and already imposed, or actually shipped out, it is unlawful if the tax authority determined it as refund and refund, and the tax authority did not refund the amount of liquor tax, etc., unless there is a provision under the tax law that can receive refund or deduction from the other party, unless there is a provision under the above tax law, it cannot be deemed that the above liquor tax amount, etc. falls under the erroneous payment, excessive payment, or refundable tax amount to be refunded by the tax authority under Article 51 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes.

Liquor tax shall be liable to pay liquor tax on the alcoholic beverages which were shipped out of a manufactory pursuant to Article 21 of the Liquor Tax Act when alcoholic beverages are shipped out of a manufactory or when alcoholic beverages are taken out of a bonded area, and in cases where alcoholic beverages existing in a manufactory are deemed to have been shipped out pursuant to subparagraph 2 of Article 22 of the Liquor Tax Act due to the revocation of a manufacture license, the manufacturer is liable to pay liquor tax on the alcoholic beverages which were shipped out at the time of their shipment. Unless otherwise provided for in tax-related Acts, unless otherwise, the above tax liability set out in the actual situation of the alcoholic beverages which were shipped out after the date of shipment does not change or extinguish, but if the manufacturer pays liquor tax on the alcoholic beverages which were shipped out, the taxation on such alcoholic beverages shall be terminated.

Therefore, even if the manufacturer fails to recover the amount of liquor tax imposed on the manufacturer by undergoing the procedure for exemption from liquor tax pursuant to the provisions of Article 28 of the Liquor Tax Act, etc. when the liquor tax is partially decided on the manufacturing process, etc., or when the liquor tax already imposed on the manufacturer is actually withdrawn from the other party, it cannot be deemed that the above liquor tax amount, etc. constitutes an erroneous payment, excessive payment, or refundable tax to be refunded by the tax authority under Article 51 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, unless there is a provision under the tax law that can receive a refund or deduction of the corresponding amount of liquor tax, etc.

Nevertheless, the court below's decision to refund liquor tax on alcoholic beverages which were delivered for shipment under Article 22 subparagraph 2 of the Liquor Tax Act is just in the case of this case where, even though there are no special provisions in tax-related Acts, it is possible to change the contents of the subsequent taxation or refund the tax already paid pursuant to Article 51 of the National Tax Basic Act since it is possible for the plaintiff to release alcoholic beverages existing in the plaintiff's manufactory at the time when the plaintiff's manufacture license was revoked, and a new manufacture license was newly granted to the plaintiff after the plaintiff's manufacture license was delivered, and some of the alcoholic beverages which were delivered for shipment were delivered for delivery as tax-free goods, and the above portion of the alcoholic beverages which were delivered for delivery was delivered for delivery as a result of the official approval in the process of manufacture, etc., and the decision to refund liquor tax on the alcoholic beverages which were delivered for shipment and the corresponding liquor tax were not delivered for the plaintiff. Accordingly, the court below's decision to revoke the above refund order and the corresponding tax imposition was unlawful, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)