Since the provision has been effective only for the supplied portion after the enforcement of this provision, that provision has become effective.

The instant disposition on the previous supply portion asserts to the effect that the disposition was unlawful. However, the instant disposition is unlawful.

Article 1(1) and Article 13(1) and (3) of the former Value-Added Tax Act is established pursuant to Article 1(1) and Article 13(1) and (3) of the former Value-Added Tax Act, so long as the provision of this case is merely a confirmatory provision, Article 2 of the Addenda to the foregoing provision of this case provides that "this Decree shall apply from the portion of the first supply or supply or the import declaration after the enforcement of this Decree." However, it is nothing more than providing that the purport of interpreting the provision of this case should be applied from the time prescribed in Article

(8) Where the customer purchases goods from his/her business establishment as a secondary transaction, he/she shall purchase them before the purchase.

Where a settlement is made with a lot point accumulated in future, the lot point accumulated as such shall be the lot point;

In addition to the plaintiffs, it includes the first transaction with an affiliated company, which is formed through the second transaction.

The amount equivalent to the portion formed through a partnership among the lot points used in the future shall be the plaintiffs.

Since full return is made in cash from this affiliated company, the second generation occurred from the plaintiffs' operating store.

portion accumulated in a lot point in transaction shall be excluded from the tax base of value-added tax;

As to the portion corresponding to a lot point formed through an association, at least the plaintiffs shall be entitled to vote.

No value-added tax may be paid, and double by receiving a refund from a partner as well as a refund thereof.

There are some aspects that look at the interests of the company.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' appeal against the defendants is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed.

this decision is delivered with the assent of all Justices.

Each part of the revocation tax column in the disposition of refusal to request the correction of value-added tax against the plaintiffs

(b) revoke the subsection (3).

This court's reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of some of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance and addition of some contents as follows. Thus, this court's reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of

(2) The main part shall be the part

○ Part 5 and 6 of the 4th judgment of the court of first instance, "receiving money in cash" shall be considered as "receiving money in cash."

The part of the 12th judgment of the first instance court regarding the "goods and quantity" of the 14th judgment is regarded as "quality and quantity". The part concerning the 3rd judgment of the first instance court in the 15th judgment is "no," and whether to use a lot point or certificate certificate in the second transaction, and how to use it is according to the customer's will."

The portion of 15th sentence of the judgment of the first instance shall be added as a "slot point". < Amended by Act No. 1548, Dec. 7, 1997>

○ The following shall be added to the 17th sentence of the first instance court and the subsequent 9th sentence:

7. The Plaintiffs, even if the instant provision is valid, pursuant to Article 2 of the Addenda thereto.