logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.10.18 2017구합52393
관세등부과처분취소
Text

1. Each disposition taken by the Defendant against the Plaintiff on August 1, 2016, as indicated in the separate sheet, shall be revoked.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. B (hereinafter “B”) imports Machining Cers (hereinafter “instant imported goods”) produced by Company C (the Switzerland), which is the Switzerland company, through D companies located in Hong Kong (hereinafter “distributor”), and submitted an import declaration stating that the country of origin issued by the selling company is subject to conventional tariffs under the Free Trade Agreement between the Republic of Korea, the European Union, and its member countries (hereinafter “instant Free Trade Agreement”), along with a package statement, commercial invoice, and certificate of origin written by the selling company, along with documents evidencing the country of origin. The Defendant accepted the declaration.

Import declaration on May 4, 201, the conventional tariff rate of the traded goods E on the import declaration date, and 2% of the machining cers on July 31, 201, F 1% of the machiningers on July 31, 2012

B. On January 3, 2013, the Plaintiff merged B as a corporation engaged in the manufacture and sale of facilities for the manufacture of semiconductors and flat panel displays.

C. On September 19, 2014, the Defendant conducted a written investigation to verify the origin of the above documents evidencing the origin, which was submitted by B on September 19, 2014, and as a result, confirmed that the above documents evidencing the origin were issued in a third country ( Hong Kong), not the Contracting Parties of the instant FTA, and requested the Plaintiff to revise them as documents evidencing the origin issued by the approved exporter in the Contracting Parties.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff submitted the certificate of delivery issued by the manufacturing company with respect to the instant imported goods, and the certificate of delivery was made on October 14, 2014 after the date of application for conventional tariffs (the date of import declaration).

The defendant does not issue a packing statement and a commercial invoice (hereinafter referred to as "the primary origin declaration") among the documents evidencing origin that B submitted initially by the defendant, but the delivery certificate that the plaintiff submitted additionally by the producing company (hereinafter referred to as "the second origin declaration") is after the date of application for conventional tariffs.

arrow