Whether the goods, which artificially collect a royalty royalty, and are equally distributed to the alteration of the form of goods, constitute a symbol beverage containing a royalty royalty under the provisions of the former Enforcement Decree of the Special Consumption Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 10982, Dec. 31, 1982).

In light of the fact that the goods loaded in a container by combining the tariff rates of about 3 percent per annum collected by a person who runs the two-wing business in a special method in the high ranking of the goods shall not be deemed to be a symbol beverage different from the two-mentioned goods, such goods shall not be deemed to fall under any one listed in the Enforcement Decree of the former Special Consumption Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 10982, Dec. 31, 1982) in light of the fact that the two-wing business does not fall under any one listed in the taxable goods of the Enforcement Decree of the former Special Consumption Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 10982, Dec. 31, 1982).

Subparagraph 3 Item 4 (c) of Table 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the former Special Consumption Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 982 of Dec. 31, 1982)

[Judgment of the court below]

The director of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 83Gu1040 delivered on July 12, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found that the alteration of the royalty Nos. 1 through 2 percent (in the case of alteration of the form and quality) or 5 through 10 percent (in the case of alteration of the form and quality) in the process of collecting the evidence adopted by the plaintiff, the goods of this case that were shipped into the market by attaching the trademark "No. 5 to 10 percent (in the case of alteration of the form and quality of earth and sand)" were shipped into a 2-day production waterway No. 1 (in the case of the alteration of the form and quality of 1 to 3-day products) in the same manner as 10 percent in the form and form as the 3-day form and form as the 10-day form and form of tobacco No. 1 to 3, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the form and use of the kind and form as shown in the judgment below, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of the form and nature of the specific consumption tax as otherwise stated in the Presidential Decree.

Ultimately, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices O Sung-sung(Presiding Justice)