2. The plaintiff shall bear the litigation costs.

A. The Plaintiff is a company established on December 8, 1997 for the purpose of operating electricity generation business, etc. in accordance with the government's private capital inducement plan, and sells the power generated therefrom to the electricity market operated by the Korea Power Exchange (KPX) by constructing two power generation facilities capacity of 537W LNG compound power plants at ○○ city on February 13, 2006 and May 15, 2006.

B. On March 18, 2007, the Plaintiff voluntarily reported and paid corporate tax, etc. for the business year of 2006, and on June 18, 2007, the Plaintiff voluntarily reported and paid the corporate tax, etc. for the business year of 2006. Since the Plaintiff produced two-lane electric production from the power generation facilities consisting of the waste heat generated after the production of electricity by using a one-laner (hereinafter “instant power generation facilities”), the instant power generation facilities constituted “energy-saving facilities” under Article 25 (2) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 9131 of Sep. 26, 2008; hereinafter “Special Tax Treatment Control Act”) on the grounds that the instant power generation facilities constitute “energy-saving facilities” as stipulated in Article 25 (2) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act by filing a tax credit for the investment of energy-saving facilities with the Defendant for the business year of 2006,349,393,480 won.

C. Accordingly, on September 18, 2007, the Defendant rejected a request for correction on the ground that the instant power generation facilities fall under “energy generation and supply facilities” as stipulated in Article 13-2 and [Attachment 8-5] of the former Enforcement Rule of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance No. 16 of Apr. 29, 2008; hereinafter “Enforcement Rule of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act”), it cannot be subject to tax credit because it is a new facility investment rather than a replacement of facilities, and the heat of 500 cc, which was discharged from the first generation from the interburine, should be used for the second development (hereinafter “the instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 2 and 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) The power generation facilities of this case are energy saving equipment using waste heat.

Since the power generation facilities of this case are operated in the way of producing secondary power using waste heat discarded in the production process after burning LNG (e.g., liquefied natural gas), it constitutes "facilities generating effective energy, such as steam and water, using smoke heat, process heat and waste gas" in Article 25-2 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, Article 13-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act and attached Table 8-5 of the Enforcement Rule of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (hereinafter referred to as "the attached Table of this case").

(ii)in violation of the principle of Retroactive Taxation and the principle of good faith;

The above interpretation has been confirmed several times due to the authoritative interpretation by the National Tax Service, etc., and the Defendant’s taxation disposition of this case by following such authoritative interpretation, etc. is unlawful as it violates the principle of retroactive taxation prohibition or the principle of good faith.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(i)The thermal power generation facilities, among the electric power generation facilities, have improved steam turf power generation (electric power generation) in order to improve heat efficiency in the order of the development method, sturf power generation (internal power generation) sturf power generation (the re-use of high temperature gas discharged from steam turf power by steam turf power), sturf power generation (the re-use of steam turf power by steam turf power), and heating and water combined power generation (the method of using surplus heat after multiple power generation

(ii) LNG complex power generation facilities using LNG as fuel have been improved in the above order. In Korea, from around 192, LNG complex power generation facilities have been introduced in 2003 and complex power generation methods have been generalized since 2003. In other words, Korea is producing approximately 13,086W power (limited to 24% of the total power generation capacity in Korea) with complex power generation facilities in 2003.

(iii)LNG complex thermal power plants shall first produce a master electricity by returning a master electricity with the thermal power generated by burning LNG, and design and install a steam turbine by converting the heat above 500 cc from the master electricity into the steam after converting the heat above 500 cc from the steam into the steam again by returning the steam turbine.

(iv)In the case of general LNG complex thermal power generation, the heat efficiency level is 60 per cent (59 per cent in the case of wind power generation, 90 per cent in the case of hydroelectric power generation) or 50 per cent in the case of hydroelectric power generation (9 per cent in the case of hydroelectric power generation). If the posters are operated only in the case of hydroelectric power complex, the

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Nos. 2, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleading

D. Determination

1) Whether the instant power generation facilities constitute energy saving facilities using waste heat

Under the principle of no taxation without law, the interpretation of tax laws and regulations shall be interpreted in accordance with the text of the law, barring any special circumstances, and shall not be extensively interpreted or analogically interpreted without reasonable grounds. In particular, it accords with the principle of fair taxation to strictly interpret that a provision clearly deemed a preferential provision among the requirements for reduction and exemption accords with the principle of fair taxation (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Du11372, Aug. 20, 2009).

In light of these legal principles, the plaintiff's assertion that the power generation facilities of this case fall under "facilities generating effective energy, such as steam and hot water, using smoke, waste heat, process heat, and waste gas" as stated in Section 1.b. (1) (a) (2) of the attached Table of this case cannot be accepted for the following reasons.

①이 사건 별표 규정의 '에너지절약시설'은 크게 에너지이용합리와 시설, 신・재생에너지 보급시설, 기타 시설로 구분된다. 에너지이용합리화시설은 다시 그 시설의 내용에 따라 '에너지 발생 및 공급시설'과 '에너지이용시설'로 구분되고, 에너지 발생 및 공급 시설의 세부 항목으로는 보일러, 요(窯)・로(爐), 집단에너지시설이, 에너지이용시설의 세부 항목으로는 산업・건물 부문 에너지절약설비, 전력수요관리설비, 고효율인증기자재가 각각 규정되어 있다. 이러한 규정 형식에 비추어 보면, 에너지이용시설이란 전체 시설 내에서 에너지를 '이용'하게 되는 과정만 존재하면 그 부분만을 따로 떼어 에너지이용시설에 해당하는 것으로 해석할 수는 없고, 당해 시설의 전체적인 기능이 앞서 본 에너지 발생 및 공급시설에서 '발생 및 공급'한 에너지를 받아 이를 '이용'하는 시설에 국한된다고 봄이 상당하다.

(2) If we do not interpret it as above, it is likely that even the boiler, stove, stove, etc., detailed items of the above energy generation and supply facilities may constitute disposal energy recovery facilities among energy use facilities, boiler, essential and auxiliary devices, etc., depending on the characteristics of the specific constituent parts, and the purport of strict restrictions on the relevant requirements may be circumvented due to increased emissions, energy use efficiency, maximum temperature, waste heat recovery rate, replacement of existing facilities, etc. in energy generation and supply facilities.

(3) In the instant power generation facilities, the purpose of energy development is to develop energy from the beginning, but the instant power generation facilities are virtually designed in a single facility, in substance, combined with the first generation facilities, which are the first generation facilities of electricity, with a view to enhancing the heat efficiency in the process of power generation. As such, it is difficult to view only the portion of the instant power generation facilities consisting of the layout boiler and steam turbine separately from the part of the instant power generation facilities, by taking advantage of the heat from the steam turbine to the second generation facilities.

(4) In addition, Article 22-2 (1) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 20620 of Feb. 22, 2008) stipulates the Energy Use Rationalization Act as an Act based on the Energy-Saving Facilities. According to Article 2 of the former Energy Use Rationalization Act (amended by Act No. 9236 of Dec. 26, 2008) and each subparagraph of Article 2 of the Framework Act on Energy, the term and expressions in the attached Table of this case are somewhat different, but the term and expressions in the attached Table of this case are clearly different from the term, but the term "energy supply facilities" are clearly divided into the term "energy supply facilities". In this case, the power generation facilities of this case refer to the term "facilities such as factories and places of business using energy or facilities using energy by converting the energy into the term "facilities installed to produce, convert, transport or store energy" rather than such energy use facilities. Ultimately, it is difficult to view the power generation facilities of this case as included in the energy supply facilities of this case.

(5) The gas from the power generation facilities of this case reaches 500 %) 500 % of the heat energy contained therein is considerably high. Thus, it seems that even if the general facilities, other than the energy-saving facilities, can be used as an independent energy source. Therefore, deeming the facilities using the energy-saving facilities including the crime of “waste heat” to be energy-saving facilities is inconsistent with the purpose of enacting the Energy Use Rationalization Act.

(ii)whether it is in breach of the principle of no taxation, good faith and good faith;

The principle of good faith or the principle of respect for tax practices prescribed in Article 18(3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, only applies to cases where there are special circumstances deemed that the protection of taxpayer’s trust is consistent with the concept of justice even if the principle of legality is sacrificeed, and the interpretation of tax-related Acts or the practice of national tax administration generally accepted by taxpayers refers to the extent that it is deemed unreasonable for taxpayers, who are not a specific taxpayer, to have accepted a wrongful interpretation or practice without any objection, to the extent that it is not unreasonable for taxpayers to trust such interpretation or practice. The burden of proving the existence of such interpretation or practice is the taxpayer (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Du1253, Oct. 25, 2002).

In the instant case, even if there was an authoritative interpretation, inquiry, etc. by the National Tax Service, such as the Plaintiff’s assertion, it cannot be deemed an administrative rule with external binding force, and it cannot be deemed as a judgment only when specific conditions are satisfied with respect to a specific person’s questioning. As such, such interpretation is generally accepted by taxpayers or cannot be deemed as a public expression of opinion that is subject to taxpayer’s trust. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant disposition was unlawful as it violates the principle of retroactive taxation prohibition and the principle of good faith is without merit

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.