관세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. From February 2, 2013 to May 22, 2013, the Plaintiff imported a tariff concession provision (hereinafter “product number”) under the former WTO Agreement, etc. (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25052, Dec. 31, 2013) of the HS, a U.S. corporation, as an import declaration number of 12356-13-0584121 and 4 items (the specific number is the attached Table 1 import declaration column; hereinafter “instant product”). The Plaintiff accepted the import declaration from KSN company as a tariff concession provision under the former WTO Agreement, etc. (amended by Presidential Decree No. 25050, Dec. 31, 2013) that is 0% of the customs duty rate under the HS.
B. On July 8, 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the item number of the instant imported goods ought to be changed to “the HS K Article 9031.80-999,” which is 8% of the tariff rate, according to the result of the audit conducted by the Korea Customs Service, the Defendant would change the item number of the instant goods in dispute and notify the Plaintiff that the customs duties, value-added taxes, and additional taxes will be
C. On July 28, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for pre-assessment review with the Defendant, but the Defendant dismissed the said request on September 30, 2014, and on October 13, 2014, the Plaintiff decided and notified each of the customs duties, value-added taxes, and additional taxes on the instant dispute, as described in the attached Table 1.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.
On December 22, 2014, the Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, requested a trial to the Tax Tribunal, but was dismissed on April 30, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 3 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The plaintiff's assertion has been subject to 0% of the customs duty rate while filing an import declaration on the imported goods of this case for a long time. The defendant's assertion on the special case of the customs law for the implementation of the former Free Trade Agreement with respect to the goods in this case, which are the same goods.