Cases of non-taxation practices for temporary use of harbor facilities;

If the Defendant (the head of Busan Metropolitan City/Gu) did not impose the license tax on the Plaintiff for the last three years until the relevant statute was repealed, it should be deemed that the Plaintiff (the taxpayer) has committed a non-taxation practice. As such, it should be deemed that the tax imposed retroactively on the Plaintiff after the lapse of one year and seven months from the date on which the relevant statute was repealed, is an unlawful disposition that disregards the national tax administration practices that the Plaintiff received by the taxpayer.

Article 18 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Supreme Court Decision 80Nu6 delivered on June 10, 1980, 81Nu16 delivered on March 10, 1981, 80Nu601 Delivered on September 22, 1981, 81Nu601 Delivered on December 8, 1981, 81Nu30 Delivered on November 23, 1982

The Federation of Korea Shipping Corporation

Attorney Han-dae et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Daegu High Court Decision 81Gu22 delivered on February 9, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that there was no only one license tax imposed until December 30, 1978, when the applicable law of the license tax applicable to the temporary use of harbor facilities concerning the Southern Port (Class 2) of this case was established since December 31, 1975, and that there was no single license tax imposed (this fact is the person representing the defendant at the fifth statutory date of the court below as the representative of the defendant at the court below). Thus, if the defendant was able to impose the license tax on the plaintiff for the last three years until the law applicable to the imposition of the license tax of this case was abolished, it was difficult for the plaintiff as the taxpayer to believe that the non-taxation practice was conducted since 1 year and seven months have passed since the date on which the applicable law was abolished, and it was clearly justified in the court below's determination that the non-taxation practice was not legitimate in light of the legal principles as to the imposition of national tax by the taxpayer's temporary use of harbor facilities and the record as to the imposition of the license tax of this case.

Therefore, the defendant's 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.

Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)