The court below accepted the plaintiff's claim on the ground that the defendant imposed the penalty tax under Article 41 of the Corporate Tax Act, which should be regarded as a kind of corporate tax, on the ground that the special corporation under the Agricultural Cooperatives Act, which is a special corporation under Article 8 of the same Act, is exempt from taxes and charges from the State or local governments with respect to the business and property of the National Agricultural Cooperative and the local government under Article 8 of the same Act, and the income and profit of the Agricultural Cooperatives under Article 4 (1) 6 of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, is an invalid disposition against the above relevant laws and regulations

However, according to Article 47 (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, which is the enforcement law at the time of this case, the additional tax shall be an item of national tax stipulated by the pertinent tax-related Acts, and if the national tax is reduced or exempted, the additional tax shall not be included in the national tax so reduced or exempted. Article 2 (2) of the Act on the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption before the Amendment (Law No. 2678 of Dec. 19, 197) also provides that the corporate tax to be reduced or exempted under this Act, treaties and the Acts enumerated in each subparagraph of paragraph (1) shall not include the additional tax (limited to the additional tax on withholding and submission of data for a corporation incorporated under Article 4), except as otherwise provided in this Act. This Act shall be applied more preferentially than the Agricultural Cooperatives Act on the tax reduction or exemption for the Plaintiff Union (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 76Nu2777, Jun. 7, 197; 7Nu117, Jan. 29, 1974).

Therefore, the court below did not make an incomplete deliberation that the court below accepted the plaintiff's claim for the reason that the additional tax in this case is a kind of corporate tax, or did not affect the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the legal principles on the Framework Act on National Taxes, the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, and the Agricultural Cooperatives Act, without examining whether the type of the additional tax in this case or it can be added on the ground of the plaintiff'

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed by accepting the grounds of appeal by the defendant litigation performer against this point, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Han-jin (Presiding Justice)