This case generally accepted the taxpayer's practice of national tax administration

The Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, which was a provision on the basis of imposing the license tax for the bonded transportation business, did not impose only one license tax for the last four years until it was enacted on October 1, 1973 and repealed. If the Commissioner of the Korea Customs Service recommended the elimination of the relevant legal provisions in the need of public interest such as the expansion of export, he shall be deemed that the said practice of non-taxation for the license tax was made. The imposition of the license tax for the first four years after the abolition of the tax-founded provision is an illegal disposition that disregards the principle of good faith and the above practice.

Article 18(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes Article 160(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 80Nu6 Decided June 10, 1980, Supreme Court Decision 81Nu16 Decided March 10, 1981

Attorney Lee Young-gu, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

The head of Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Seoul High Court Decision 79Gu243 delivered on December 16, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The defendant's grounds of appeal are examined.

The purpose of Article 18(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes is to guarantee taxpayers' rights against the so-called requisition power and to protect the trust interests of the general taxpayers who believe their words and actions. Thus, the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, which was the basis for imposing the Customs Transportation License Tax in this case, was enacted October 1, 1973, and was abolished on September 20, 197, only one of the previous licenses was not imposed, and the Commissioner of the Korea Customs Service and the head of its affiliated customs office did not impose the license tax for the past four years. Under the view that it is not necessary for the public interest of expansion of export and the interpretation of Article 160(1) of the Local Tax Act, and that it is unreasonable for the Ministry of Home Affairs and the head of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor to delete the corresponding provisions at the time of revision of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, 1977, and 200,0000 won, including the above license tax, were not imposed for 16 months prior to the amendment of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act.

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.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)