(영문) 서울고등법원 2007. 10. 16. 선고 2006누17101 판결

beta

구매승인서에 의한 영세율 적용을 부인한 처분의 당부[일부국패]

Title

propriety of a disposition denying the zero tax rate under a written purchase approval

Summary

It is reasonable to see that gold bullion is not exported at the time of transaction. Thus, a disposition denying the application of zero tax rate under a purchase approval is legitimate.

Related statutes

Article 11 (Application of Value-Added Tax Act)

Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

A. The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax of KRW 5,245,694,830 in March 1, 2001; KRW 5,234,850,220 in the imposition disposition of KRW 5,245,69,830 in 199; KRW 506,387,640 in the imposition disposition of KRW 512,832,080 in 1999; and KRW 1,523,690 in the imposition disposition of KRW 1,690 in the first-year value-added tax of KRW 512,832,08 in 199.

B. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

2. The total cost of a lawsuit shall be twenty minutes, which shall be borne by the plaintiff, and the remainder by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax of KRW 5,245,694,830 in 199 against the Plaintiff on March 1, 2001, each disposition of KRW 9,79,798,220 in 200, value-added tax of KRW 512,832,080 in 200.

2. Purport of appeal

The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance equivalent to 1,335,228,90 won in the disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 5,245,694,830 in March 1, 2001 and KRW 1,335,228,90 in the disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 5,832,080 in the year 1999, and KRW 3,212,49 in the disposition of value-added tax of KRW 512,832,08 in the year 199, value-added tax of KRW 9,798,220 in the

Defendant

: Cancellation of the part of the judgment of the first instance, and all of the plaintiff's claims corresponding to the cancellation are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Since around 1983, ○○○, the representative director of the Plaintiff, engaged in the ○○○○○, the largest domestic gold wholesale market, and established the Plaintiff for the purpose of gold and silver retail business, etc. on June 23, 1993. The current domestic sales unit price of the Plaintiff’s domestic sales unit as a wholesaler, which was publicly notified by the Plaintiff, has been determined based on the domestic sales unit price of other companies.

B. During the period from February 4, 1999 to June 30, 200, the Plaintiff did not collect an amount equivalent to value-added tax from the sales enterprise of this case on the ground that it would be exported at zero-rate tax rate at present by applying the transaction to ○○○, ○ Trade Co., Ltd., ○○ Trade, ○○○ Unemployment, ○○△△△ice ( Park○), ○○△△ice Co., Ltd., ○○○○○, ○○○○ Co., Ltd., ○○○, ○○○○ Co., Ltd., and ○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “instant companies”) for the reason that it would be exported at zero-rate tax rate.

C. The defendant, after 199, 97, 958,37 won in total (32,921, 260, 437 won in the first half of 199, 209, 315, 646 won in the second half of 199, 761, 294 won in the first half of 200, 761, 294 won in the supply of value-added tax (hereinafter referred to as "the sale of this case") for 30 years in the above transaction supplied by the plaintiff to the seller of this case, for the reasons that the sale of this case was 16,97, 97, 97, 37 won in total, 300 won in the sale of this case, 90 won in the sale of this case, 20 years in the sale of this case, 30 years in the sale of this case and 90 years in the sale of this case after 20 years in the sale of this case.

Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 1-1, 2, and 3, each entry, and the purport prior to pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The parties' assertion

(1) The plaintiff's assertion

Since the Plaintiff had different knowledge of the fact that the purchase approval was required to apply the zero-rate tax rate at the time of the transaction with ○○ △ ice, and the Plaintiff actually exported the present purchase from the Plaintiff, the zero-rate tax rate should be applied to the transaction between ○ △△ ice and the Plaintiff, regardless of whether or not the purchase approval was submitted.

On the other hand, the letter of approval for purchase of this case, which the plaintiff submitted from other sellers, was issued lawfully by the foreign exchange bank head, and even if there is any defect in detailed matters, so long as the plaintiff applied the zero-rate tax rate with the belief that it is valid, the requirements for applying the zero-rate tax rate for the transaction of this case are met, and the underlying documents for the subsequent letter of approval for purchase are proved to be lawful, or the sales of this case did not actually export the goods at present, cannot be deemed to be excluded from zero-rate tax rate.

(2) The defendant's assertion

(a) A purchase approval must be submitted to apply the zero-rate tax rate on the ground that it is a transaction premised on export.

(나) 또한, 제출된 구매승인서에 기하여 영세율이 적용되기 위하여는, ㉠ 구매승인서등의 발급 주체가 '외국환은행의 장'이어야 하고, ㉡ 발급 시기는 재화의 공급시기가 속하는 과세기간 내이어야 하며, ㉢ 신청방식은 구 대외무역관리규정(이하 '대외무역관리규정'이라 한다)별지 제4-2호 서식인 '외화획득용 원료(물품 등) 구매(공급) 확인신청서'에 의한 신청이어야 하고, ㉣ 위 신청 시에 수출신용자 등과 외화회득용 물품공급계약서 또는 물품매도확약서를 첨부하여야 한다.

However, since a considerable number of the letter of approval for the purchase of this case was issued by a branch director, etc. who is not the head of the foreign exchange bank, it did not meet the requirements for the subject of the letter of approval for the purchase.

In addition, according to the purchase confirmation form of the Foreign Trade Management Regulations, the unit price, amount column may be omitted when the purchase approval is issued, but the reference document and number, HS number, name and size, quantity, effective date, date of shipment, and the shipment date shall be all stated. However, a considerable number of the purchase approval forms of this case shall not be deemed valid as they are issued without stating the source document name and number column, effective date, shipment date, etc. or after the expiry of the effective date.

(C) The purport of the submission of a purchase approval for the application of zero-rate tax rate is to prove that a transaction is based on the premise of export, and thus applying zero-rate tax exceptionally on the ground that it is currently exported in such state or processed state. However, since the instant seller purchased and exported the current trade approval based on an uneffective trade approval and sold in Korea instead of exporting, the instant transaction based on the instant trade approval shall be deemed not to fall under zero-rate tax rate

(D) The Plaintiff believed that the instant purchase approval is valid and that it will be exported from the date of sale. However, the Plaintiff, despite being aware of the defects in the instant purchase approval, conspired with the instant seller to evade taxes, thereby making the instant transaction. Thus, the instant transaction is not subject to zero-rate tax rate, since it did not qualify as the instant transaction.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Whether the zero tax rate for each transaction of this case is applied

(1) Where a purchase approval is not submitted (transaction between the plaintiff and the ○△△).

Comprehensively taking account of the whole purport of the argument in the statement Nos. 5-1 and 2, it can be recognized that the Plaintiff did not submit a written approval for purchase while engaging in the transaction that the Plaintiff supplied ○○○ through five times from February 4, 199 to May 7, 199 with the total amount of KRW 119,127,270,00. Under Article 11(1)1 of the Value-Added Tax Act and Article 24(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, the zero-rate tax rate shall apply only to the goods exported. However, in case where the Plaintiff supplied the goods through a local letter of credit and a written approval for purchase under the Foreign Trade Act, it is legitimate for the Defendant’s disposition denying the application of zero-rate tax rate to the transaction for which the Plaintiff did not submit a written approval for purchase.

(2) there is a defect at the time of issuing the purchase approval.

Meanwhile, Article 9-2 (2) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that a foreign exchange bank's written approval for the application of zero-rate tax rate refers to a written approval issued by the head of the foreign exchange bank within the taxable period to which the time of supply for the goods belongs. According to each description of Gap evidence 3-5, 6, 7, 8-2, 8, 9, 10-2, 10-2, and 3, 000 won, 20,43, 984 won is currently purchased from the plaintiff on June 29, 199, and 200-6, 30-6, 000 won after the expiration of the taxable period to which the time of supply belongs (the amount stated in the written approval for the purchase is KRW 19,660,800, 300, 2000, 30-6,000 won, 160-6,000 won.

The Plaintiff argues that the zero-rate tax rate shall apply even if it is not issued within the taxable period to which the current supply date belongs, and even if it is issued prior to the issuance of a purchase approval in accordance with the transaction practices, the application of zero-rate tax rate under the value-added tax system is recognized as a matter of principle only for exports to prevent double taxation, and as to domestic consumption, it is equivalent to the above exports, and exceptional and limited recognition should be made only when it conforms to the national policy purpose of foreign exchange promotion to the extent that it does not impair foreign exchange management and the order of collection of value-added tax (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 83Nu409, Dec. 27, 1983). The instant disposition that the Defendant denied the application of zero-rate tax rate to the above transactions in accordance with the above Enforcement Rule.

(3) If the letter of approval for purchase is forged;

In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence 4-1 through 7, Gap evidence 41, Eul evidence 4-1, Eul evidence 4-1, and Eul evidence 4-2, the plaintiff offered ○○ trade for 10,626,520,080 won over 43 times between May 19, 199 and June 30, and submitted 7's purchase approval (However, the total amount of the purchase approval is KRW 9,967,279,915). The above purchase approval is not issued by the head of foreign exchange bank, but forged 3's purchase approval which is the premise of applying zero-rate tax rate, so long as the above purchase approval was forged, it is legitimate to deny the application of zero-rate tax rate from 00,000,000 won for 19,000 domestic markets for the purpose of 9,000,000 domestic markets for the purpose of 9,000,000 won.

(4) If there is a defect in the notice of approval for purchase.

In full view of the overall purport of arguments in the statements in Gap evidence 3-1 through 4, 8, 5-3 through 22, 6-3 through 9, 11 through 15, 7-3 through 11, 8-4, 3-1 through 6 of Eul evidence 3-1, 1, 3-2 of the purchase approval of this case issued with Gap evidence 5-3, 7-3, 8 through 11 of the "head of the foreign exchange bank", 2, 00 unemployment, 00 through 9-1, 3-1 through 9 of the purchase approval of this case issued with Gap evidence 5 of this case (this evidence Nos. 5-3 through 22, 00, 000, 9-1 through 9 of the purchase approval of this case, 3-1, 9-1, 9-3, 9-1, 9-1, 9-3, 9-1, 9-1, 9-3

According to Article 53(1) of the Foreign Trade Act, Article 38(4) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Foreign Trade Act, and Article 116(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Foreign Trade Act provide that the authority to issue a purchase approval and follow-up management shall be entrusted to the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy, and the head of a foreign exchange bank shall not be obliged to directly perform the said authority, and the head of the foreign exchange bank may appoint an agent to act on behalf of the head of the foreign exchange bank and carry out the said authority through such appointment. Therefore, even if some of the instant purchase approval was issued by the head of the foreign exchange bank by a branch office, etc. other than the head

In addition, according to Article 24(2)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, Article 9-2(2) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Value-Added Tax Act, and Article 4-27(1) of the former Enforcement Rule of the Foreign Exchange Regulations, a purchase approval is sufficient when the head of a foreign exchange bank issues the goods to be purchased as raw materials or goods for foreign exchange earnings within the taxable period to which the time of supply belongs, and there is no limitation on the formal requirements, such as the necessary descriptions or names of the above documents, and there is no limitation on the above approval. Thus, even if there is a defect issued after the expiry of the effective date, some of the documents are not stated in the letter of credit, export contract, foreign currency purchase certificate, and local letter of credit, etc., and there is no error in the issuance of the purchase approval of this case submitted by the Plaintiff to the sales enterprise, and there is no error in the issuance of the purchase approval of this case after the expiration of the effective date, it cannot be viewed that the above approval was invalid by 2060%.

On the other hand, the Value-Added Tax Act does not require that the goods supplied at zero-rate tax rate should have been actually exported after the transaction, and even according to the General Rules 11-24-9 of the Value-Added Tax Act, the zero tax rate shall apply regardless of whether the goods supplied at a local letter of credit or a purchase approval stipulated in the Foreign Trade Act have been used for export purposes after the supply. Thus, the issue of whether the Plaintiff actually supplied to the instant seller does not affect the application of zero-rate tax, and thus, even if the instant seller did not actually export the current or its processed goods, it cannot be said that the Plaintiff’s current transaction of this case is excluded from zero-rate tax rate.

(5) Whether the Plaintiff was aware of the defect in the contents of the purchase approval

Ultimately, as seen earlier, the transaction between the Plaintiff and ○○ World, ○○ Unemployment, ○○ Unemployment, ○○ ○○○○○○○, cannot deny the application of zero-rate tax solely on the grounds of the defect in the content of the purchase approval, and the recognition of special circumstances, such as that the Plaintiff, the supplier of the goods, was aware of the defect in the issuance of the purchase approval, can deny the application of zero-rate tax rate. As such, whether the Plaintiff was aware of such defect in the said transaction.

(A) Transaction between the Plaintiff and the ○○ World

According to Gap evidence 3-2, Gap evidence 41, Eul evidence 29, Eul evidence 29, and Eul evidence 30-1, 31-2, each of the above statements stated above 30-1, 31-2, 000, 00 ○○○○○, a wholesale market in Korea since 1999, uses the zero-rate system to avoid value-added tax at the time of the imposition of value-added tax for exports or transactions as raw materials for export, so "large wholesalers" shall be currently sold at zero-rate rate, and "large coalers" shall be treated as zero-rate rate," 9-6, 19-6, 3-6, 3-6, and 9-6, 19-6, 3-6, 3-6, 3-6, and 9-6, 3-6, 96, 3-6, 3-6, 196, 3-6, 196, 3-6, and 97, 9.

(B) Trade between the Plaintiff and ○○ Unemployment

In full view of the purport of Gap's evidence 3 and Gap's evidence 40, the defendant's rejection of zero tax rate is about the current transaction between the plaintiff and 13 times from July 27, 199 to August 24, 200. The plaintiff did not issue a separate certificate for customs duties to 0,000 won. The plaintiff's payment of 3% of the price of the above transaction was made at 0,000 won when it purchased the above transaction before the above transaction, and 3% of the price of the above transaction was now at 0,000,000,000,0000,0000,000,0000,0000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000 won.

The plaintiff's issuance of a certificate of subdivision is issued at the request of the purchaser, and it does not interfere with the issuance of a certificate of subdivision within two years after the export, and it is possible to refund customs duties by using a simple fixed amount refund system without a certificate of subdivision. Thus, it is difficult to conclude that the company that purchases the current zero-rate tax for export at the present time in light of the nature of the above certificate of subdivision cannot be seen as not requiring a certificate of subdivision. In addition, it is difficult to conclude that the company that purchases the current zero-rate tax for export at the time of the above transaction has already been promoting illegal zero-rate transaction for the purpose of evading value-added tax at the time of the above transaction, and the plaintiff also did not issue a certificate of subdivision for most transactions while conducting illegal transactions with ○○ World and ○○ trade. According to Article 16 (2) of the above Enforcement Decree, the plaintiff's assertion that the ○○ Unemployment is an enterprise produced by the exporter for a short time after the short time of time, but it does not meet the above requirements for exportation.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff was aware of the defect in the purchase approval for the above transaction in collusion with the plaintiff ○○ juice and ○○ ○○○, in light of the fact that the plaintiff was involved in a large-scale transaction for the evasion of value-added tax using a false purchase approval letter, etc. However, it is not sufficient to recognize that the above argument alone is insufficient to recognize that the plaintiff knew of the defect in the purchase approval letter submitted for the transaction between ○○ juice and ○ ○○ ○○, or that he was aware of the defect in the purchase approval letter submitted for the transaction between ○○ and ○○ ○○ ○ ○, and

(d) Justifiable tax amount.

Among the instant transactions, the transaction between the Plaintiff and ○○○○○○○○○○, which was offered by the Plaintiff for the purpose of evading value-added tax, the transaction between the forged purchase authorization submitted (if the Plaintiff conspireds for the purpose of evading value-added tax), and the transaction between ○○○○ Unemployment for which the certificate of subdivision was not issued, and the purchase authorization issued after the lapse of the taxable period (limited to the transaction equivalent to KRW 10,806,319 on June 30, 200), ○○ (limited to the transaction equivalent to KRW 20,43,984 on June 29, 29), ○○○○○ (limited to the one which is equivalent to KRW 20,43,984 on June 29, 20), 20 ○○○○○○ and ○○○○○○○○○○. 500 on the basis of the attached Table 296, 305,79,7196, respectively.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the above scope of recognition, and the remaining claims shall be dismissed without any justifiable reason. Since the judgment of the court of first instance is unfair with different conclusions, it is so decided as per Disposition by the decision of the court of first instance.

Related Acts and subordinate statutes

(1) zero tax rates shall apply to the supply of the following goods or services:

1. Exported goods;

(3) Matters necessary for the scope of goods and services under paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

2. The scope of export Article 24 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by the Presidential Decree No. 16661 of Dec. 31, 199)

3. Scope of export under Article 24 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 17186, Mar. 31, 2001);

1. Goods supplied by a businessman by a local letter of credit or letter of approval for purchase; and

4. The term “local letter of credit, etc. as provided in Articles 9-2 and 26 (1) 2 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 133, Mar. 31, 2000)” means a letter of credit, etc. established by the head of a foreign exchange bank at the request of the enterpriser concerned, where the enterpriser wishes to be supplied with raw materials, manufactured goods for export, or exported goods, processed goods or services for export in Korea;

(2) A written approval for purchase as provided in Article 24 (2) of the Decree means the approval issued by the head of a foreign exchange bank within the taxable period whereto belongs the time of supply for goods in accordance with a local letter of credit

5. The term “local letter of credit, etc. as provided in Article 9-2 of the former Enforcement Rule of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 193, Apr. 03, 2001)” means a letter of credit, etc. established by the head of a foreign exchange bank at the request of the enterpriser concerned, where the enterpriser wishes to be supplied with raw materials, manufactured goods for export, or exported goods, processed goods or services for export for export in the Republic of Korea;

(2) The term "approval for purchase" in Article 24 (2) 1 of the Decree means the approval issued by the head of a foreign exchange bank within the taxable period whereto belongs the time of supply for the goods in accordance with a local letter of credit

General Rules 11-24-9 of the Value-Added Tax Act (goods supplied under a local letter of credit or written confirmation of purchase)

The zero tax rate shall apply to goods supplied under a local letter of credit or a written confirmation of purchase as prescribed by the Foreign Trade Act, regardless of whether such goods are used for the purpose of export after their supply.

6. Delegation and entrustment of authority of Article 53 of the Foreign Trade Act (1) Part of the authority of the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy under this Act may be delegated to the heads of affiliated agencies, Mayors/Do Governors, heads of relevant administrative agencies, heads of customs offices, heads of the Bank of Korea, heads of foreign exchange banks, and other corporations or organizations prescribed by

7. The former Enforcement Decree of the Foreign Trade Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17186, Mar. 31, 2001)

(4) A person who intends to obtain approval for the transfer or acquisition of materials or equipment manufactured with raw materials or equipment for foreign exchange earnings pursuant to Article 20 (2) of the Act shall submit an application to the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy along with the documents determined by the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy.

Article 116 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Foreign Trade Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17186 of Mar. 31, 2001) (1) The Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy shall entrust the following authority pursuant to Article 53 (1) of the Act to the head of the central administrative agency in charge of the goods in question: Provided, That this shall exclude the authority over the goods under his control:

4. Authority falling under each of the following items with respect to goods (limited to items determined and publicly notified by the Minister of Commerce, Industry and Energy) manufactured with raw materials or equipment for foreign exchange earnings or with such raw materials or equipment

(1) The head of a foreign exchange bank may issue a written purchase approval pursuant to one of the following subparagraphs:

1. A letter of credit for export;

2. An export contract.

3. Certificate of purchase (deposit) of foreign currency (limited to cases where the date of payment related to foreign exchange earnings is confirmed by relevant documents);

4. Local letters of credit;

5. Written approval for purchase.

6. Documents proving that it is for the production of goods, etc. provided for obtaining foreign currencies under each subparagraph of Article 34 of the Decree;

(2) A person who intends to issue a written purchase approval shall file an application with the head of a foreign exchange bank, along with the following documents, for the confirmation of the purchase of raw materials for foreign exchange earnings in attached Form 4-2:

1. One copy of a document falling under any subparagraph of paragraph (1);

2. One copy of a contract for supply of raw materials or a certificate for sale of goods for foreign exchange earnings;

(3) The head of a foreign exchange bank may issue a secondary purchase approval according to the purchase approval issued pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1), and where the manufacturing, processing and distribution (including the distribution of complete products) of raw materials or goods for foreign exchange earnings are several stages, he/she may issue them in sequence in each stage.

9. The customs collector shall refund customs duties, etc. under Article 9 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Refund of Customs, etc. Levied on Raw Materials for Export.

10. The calculation of the period of transactions under Article 10 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Refund of Customs, etc. Levied on Raw Materials for Export (amended by the Presidential Decree No. 16985, Oct. 23, 2000) (2) The customs collector may issue a document attesting the amount of customs, etc. paid for the goods transacted in the state of being imported (in the case of transactions by local letters of credit, etc.,

(3) Any person who intends to have a document attesting the customs duties, etc. paid under paragraph (2) issued shall file an application stating the following matters with the head of the competent customs office:

1. Transferor and transferee;

2. Transfer date;

3. The name and specification of the goods;

4. The quantity and tax amount to be transferred.

5. Other matters necessary to certify the amount of customs duties, as determined by the Commissioner of the Customs Service.

(1) When the Commissioner of the Korea Customs Service determines a fixed amount refund rate table (hereinafter referred to as the “simplified fixed amount refund rate table”) applied to the export goods of small and medium enterprises under Article 13 (1) of the Act, on the refund of customs duties, etc. levied on raw materials for export. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 16985, Oct. 23, 2000>

(2) The simplified fixed amount refund rate table under paragraph (1) shall apply only to the exports of those persons as determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy. In this case, if the exporter and the producer of the exported are different, the application of the simplified fixed amount refund table shall be

11. The definitions of the terms used in this public notice in the definitions of Article 1-1-2 of the Public Notice of the Management of Refund Affairs, such as Customs Duties, etc. on Raw Materials for Export shall be as follows:

1. The term "certificate of average amount of tax" means a document certifying the average amount of tax per unit of raw materials for export (hereinafter referred to as "certificate of average amount of tax") by dividing the aggregate of duties, etc. of raw materials for export imported each month by the item number (K 10 units) of the raw materials for export;

2. The term "certificate of tax payment on basic raw materials" means a document attesting the payable amount of the raw materials for export supplied by the local letter of credit, etc. (hereinafter referred to as "certificate of tax payment");

3. The term "division certificate" means a document that proves a certificate of import declaration, a certificate of ordinary duty, or a certificate of provisional duty payment in installments (hereinafter referred to as "certificate") in order to certify the amount of tax payable on the goods imported or purchased in the original condition;

11. The cases where the decentralization may be issued under Article 10 (2) of the name of the person subject to issuance of the decentralization as prescribed in Article 4-3-1 of the Public Notice on the Handling of Refund Affairs, such as Customs Duties, etc. on Raw Materials for Export shall be as follows:

1. Where raw materials are transferred in the state of import or purchase of raw materials to an exporter or a producer of export goods or a person who produces interim raw materials to be used in producing export goods;

2. Where all or part of the goods, the Pyeongtaek certificate of which has been issued pursuant to the provisions of Article 4-1-2, are transferred as referred to in subparagraph 1 without manufacturing and processing them;

3. Where a person who has acquired raw materials provided for in Article 4-2-1 (1) transfers them as provided for in subparagraph 1 in the state of purchase;

Table of Tax Calculation

1. First-class value-added tax (unit: Won); and

Classification

① The instant disposition tax amount

(2) Justifiable tax amount.

Tax Base

GENERAL

142,914,867,117

142,853,827,569

zero Rate

82,911,411,627

82,972,451,175