Whether the processing service of kimchi is subject to tax exemption under the Value-Added Tax Act.

According to Article 12 (1) 1 of the Value-Added Tax Act, Article 28 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 10 (1) [Attachment Table 1] of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, where the ingredients of kimchi and kimchi are separately supplied, while the processed services of kimchi are exempt from exemption from exemption from exemption from exemption from taxation, there is no provision that the processed services of kimchi are provided by a food company from the Ministry of National Defense. Thus, as a case where the food company supplies the kimchi made by itself through raising, adding, and adding, salt, salt, salt, sugar, and dried fish, etc. to the Ministry of National Defense, such services are supplied concurrently to the Ministry of National Defense, and the supply of the main goods may not be included in the supply of the main goods. In the event that the services are separately supplied, it cannot be interpreted differently from the above provision, and where the kimchi is supplied as exempt from exemption from taxation, it cannot be said that it does not go against the principle of equity in the supply of kimchi, and it does not go against the principle of equity in the supply of kimchi.

Articles 1, 12(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act, Articles 18(2) and 28(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, Article 10(1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Value-Added Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 94Nu13398 delivered on February 10, 1995

Dobong Food Co., Ltd.

Hongcheon District Court Decision 201Na1448 delivered on August 1, 201

Seoul High Court Decision 94Gu4150 delivered on September 29, 1994

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

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

(1) According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court prescribed that the Plaintiff’s supply of non-processed kimchi-free kimchi-free kimchi-free kimchi-free kimchi-free kimchi-free kimchi-free kimchi-free kimchi-free ingredients to the extent that the Plaintiff, who is a cooperative member of the Korea Food and Drug Industry, is not subject to the supply of non-processed kimchi-free ingredients to the Ministry of National Defense for the first time from May 191 to February 193, the Plaintiff’s supply of non-processed kimchi-free kimchi-free ingredients-free kimchi-free ingredients-free kimchi-free ingredients-free ingredients-free kimchi-free ingredients-free kimchi-free ingredients-free ingredients-free kimchi-free ingredients-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products-free products.

(2) Article 1(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that value-added tax shall be imposed on the supply of goods or services. Paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that "goods and services" means all tangible goods and intangible goods having property value, and Paragraph (3) of the same Article provides that "services refer to all services and other acts having property value other than goods," so the supply of all goods or services, in principle, shall be subject to value-added tax unless otherwise provided for in the law. Under the principle of no taxation without law, the interpretation of tax laws and regulations must be strict and shall not be permitted. Article 12(1) of the same Act provides that the supply of the goods or services in each of the following subparagraphs shall be exempted from value-added tax until subparagraph 18, while Article 12(1) of the same Act provides that the supply of the goods or services shall be exempted from value-added tax, and it shall not be readily concluded as exempt goods, even if they are restricted, so it shall not be subject to tax-free goods, as provided for in Article 12(1)12(1)1) and 28(1) of the Act of kimchi.

In addition, in the case of the supply of kimchi as goods, it cannot be said that it goes against the principle of equity by failing to make the processing service of kimchi subject to tax exemption. Furthermore, it cannot be said that it goes against the legislative intent of the Value-Added Tax Act to supply kimchi at low prices to consumers.

Nevertheless, the lower court, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, determined that the act constitutes an exemption from customs duties for kimchi, is erroneous by misapprehending the above legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The grounds for appeal assigning this error are with merit.

(3) Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed and the case is remanded to the lower court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Don-hee (Presiding Justice)