The Busan High Court 2009Nu2450 revoked the disposition of revocation of the imposition of customs duties, etc.: the plaintiff, the appellant: the defendant, the appellant:1.2. The head of the Yongsan-gu Customs Office;

September 30, 2009

December 9, 2009

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. For the plaintiff, the corrective disposition of the amount of customs duties, etc. listed in the separate sheet No. 1 dated February 20, 2006 by the head of the defendant Yangsan Customs, the corrective disposition of the amount of customs duties, etc. listed in the separate sheet No. 2 as stated in the separate sheet No. 2 as of February 21, 2006 by the head of the defendant Yangsan Customs, and the corrective disposition of the amount of customs duties, etc. listed in the separate sheet No. 3 as of February 22, 2

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the following additions or supplementary judgments. Thus, this Court’s reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional or supplementary judgment

A. The parties' assertion

(1) There was no plaintiff's request for correction and the defendant's refusal disposition against the Defendants' Tariff Classification or Tax Rate Application. Thus, the lawsuit of this case brought on the main issue of tariff classification and tax rate application without going through the above procedure is accompanied by the subordinate law.

(2) The Plaintiff’s green tea and yellow tea in this case were harmful to human body for drinking, such as being made of low level of food and hazardous materials, etc. The Plaintiff’s melt tea and yellow tea were designated as an industrial sector (INDUSTRY) and were anticipated to be used for bath goods other than food from the time of import declaration as they were imported at a significantly low price compared to food. Thus, the instant green tea and yellow tea should be the classification of goods for bath (307.30-2000) under the premise that they are compatible with the instant green tea and yellow tea. However, the instant dispositions of this case were unlawful since each of the instant goods were classified as red teas (number 20-000) and other red teas (number 102.20-000) under the premise that they are compatible with the instant green tea and red teas (number 2090-400-0000) and each of the instant goods were classified as “the instant goods classification and taxation of this case,” and the pertinent tariff classification classification and taxation of this case was held over several controversy.

B. Determination

(1) As to the defendants' main safety defense, each of the dispositions of this case is not a disposition to add or determine the tax base and tax amount in the initial disposition, but to include only the tax base and tax amount in the initial disposition, including the tax base and tax amount in the initial disposition. Thus, if a correction disposition is made, the initial disposition is extinguished as a matter of course by absorbing the correction disposition and losing its independent existence value, and only the amount of the correction disposition is subject to a lawsuit. In this case, the plaintiff sought revocation of the whole amount of customs duties, value-added tax, and additional tax imposed as well as the increased portion by each disposition of this case. The plaintiff sought revocation of the request for correction and the decision of each of the dispositions of this case are consistent with the reasoning of the first instance judgment 2th of the judgment. Accordingly, even if the plaintiff did not have the plaintiff's request for correction of the tariff classification or tax rate and the defendant's rejection disposition, even if the plaintiff's request for revocation is limited to the increased portion by the previous disposition of this case, the tariff classification and tax rate can be asserted without the plaintiff's claim for correction.

The defendants' defense of this case is without merit.

(2) 원고의 ㉮ 주장에 관하여설령 원고의 주장처럼 이 사건 녹차 및 홍차가 수입신고시를 기준으로 그 성상, 기능, 형태, 제조 방법 등에 비추어 음용에 적합하지 않다고 가정하더라도 관세율표상 차류(품목번호 002호)나 기타 녹차(품목번호 0902.20-0000호), 기타 홍차(품목번호 0902.40-0000호)를 규정함에 있어 음용 등 특정용도를 기준으로 제한하고 있지 않은 점, HS관세율 해설(갑 제14호증, 을가 제14호증)에서 0902호에 관하여 “이 호에는 식물학상 차속(genusThea)에 속하는 관목으로부터 얻어지는 각종의 차가 분류된다. 이 호에는 차나무의 꽃․꽃봉오리 및 잔유물이 포함되며 또한 분말엽(잎․꽃․봉오리)을 구상(球狀)이나 정상(錠狀)으로증입한 것도 포함된다.”라고 하여 용도가 아닌 원재료의 식물학상 분류를 기준으로 설명하고 있는 점, 차(tea)나 녹차(green tea), 홍차(red tea)의 사전적 의미 또한 음료(beverage)에 국한되지 않으며, 차나무(tea plant) 등을 포함하는 점 등에 비추어 볼 때,음용에 적합하여야만 관세율표상 차류나 기타 녹차, 홍차에 해당되는 것은 아니라고 봄이상당하다.

In light of the fact that the green tea and red tea in this case were contained in booms in a state in which it is difficult to find out that they were scheduled to be used for any other purpose in appearance, while maintaining the characteristics of melting tea and red tea corresponding to the teas (0902) in accordance with the tariff schedule at the time of the import declaration, it is right to classify them into melting teas (product No. 20-0000) and other red teas (product No. 40902.4000) in accordance with the tariff schedule.

In addition, in light of the fact that there is no description or indication that the melting tea and red tea in this case were used for bathing goods (the plaintiff asserted that the melting tea and red tea stated the word "private rain" on the packages of the above melting tea and red tea, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it), the melting tea and red tea were distributed and used as de facto bath agents after importation, etc., or contain the indication "INDUSTRY" (the plaintiff argued that it is an "industrial use", and it was possible to import them at a price significantly lower than food). The mere fact that the above melt tea and red tea were expected to be used for bathing goods from the time of import declaration, or the classification (307.30-2000) of them as other bathing goods (307.30-2000) cannot be viewed as bathing goods at the time of import declaration in light of the shape and function of the melt tea and red tea at the time of the above melting tea's import declaration.

Ultimately, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

(3) On June 28, 2006, the Plaintiff’s assertion on the Plaintiff’s (the enforcement date is June 29, 2006) and the Tariff Classification Committee’s decision on June 28, 2006 (the enforcement date is June 29, 2006) and each of the instant dispositions are imposed on the difference of customs duties, etc. based on the omission of customs value without accepting the Plaintiff’s import declaration as it is with respect to the tariff classification and the tax rate application. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion on the grounds of violating the principle of no taxation without any justifiable reason is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.