The case holding that "alternative oil similar to gasoline" under the Special Consumption Tax Act is "alternative oil similar to gasoline" in light of the composition, form, use and nature of taxable

The taxable goods of this case are petrochemicals, which is its raw material, and are used in luene, luene, luene, etc. to use them as petrochemicals and are capable of causing high-quality rush's performance. However, the taxable goods of this case can be viewed as "alternative oil similar to gasoline" under the Special Consumption Tax Act if it is recognized that the test result added and used is good and effective as well as the effect when used as an engine fuel in case of emergency with the test result that it can be used as an engine fuel. In fact, the taxable goods of this case can be used separately on behalf of rush in case of emergency, and it can be seen as "alternative oil similar to gasoline" under the same Act.

Class 4 subparagraph 1 of Article 1(2) of the Special Consumption Tax Act; Class 4 subparagraph 1 of Article 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Special Consumption Tax Act; Class 2 subparagraph 1 of attached Table 1.

Plaintiff

(b) the Director of the Tax Office

Gwangju High Court Decision 83Gu30 delivered on January 17, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found the taxable goods of this case as follows: 60 to 70% of their ingredients; 20 to 30% of them; 0.3 to 2% of luene 9 to 18% of them; 0.1 to 0.3% of them are added to lusium clusium 0.0 to lusium 0.3% of them; 15 to lusium 15 to 30% of them are petrochemicals; 20% of them are used as alternative fuel in light of the evidence adopted by the court below; 30% of them are used as alternative fuel in the form of 15 to lusium 30% of them; 4% of them are used as alternative fuel in the form of lusium 1 to lusium 1 to lusium 1 to lusium 1 to lusium 1 to lusium 1 to lusium 1 to lusium 50% of them.

Therefore, 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)