(a) Whether melting or landing sugars, etc. are subject to taxation of the goods tax provided for in the former Tax Act;

(b) Cases of denying the duty to pay taxes according to the customary practices under Article 18 (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes;

A. A. The stoves, melting sugar, melting sugar, etc., which are naturally subdivided and packaged for medicinal herbss, such as stoves or melting, etc. of natural ginseng. Although it is a self-gyrings containing ginseng melting, etc. as prescribed by the Enforcement Decree of the former Goods Tax Act, even if the Minister of Health and Welfare granted permission and notified to the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, it is not a liquid or refining belonging to the sanctions as referred to in the Pharmacopoeia, in light of its form, use, etc., and thus, it is not subject to taxation of the goods tax under the former Goods Tax Act.

B. Even though the above melting sugar et al. were not subject to the taxation of the goods tax, even if the Plaintiff recognized that they were subject to the taxation of the goods tax and paid the goods tax, the duty to pay taxes according to the practice without any legal basis under the large principle of no taxation without the law cannot be unduly justified.

Article 1(1) of the former Goods Tax Act, Article 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Article 18(2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Plaintiff 1, et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

The assignment of the litigation performers to the head of Gangnam District Office;

Seoul High Court Decision 78Gu385 delivered on November 21, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the Defendant’s ground of appeal.

With respect to No. 1:

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below, based on the following facts, found the plaintiff's tax base return in this case and the voluntary payment of various amounts of tax, such as the gift tax, on the ground that its contents are false and not recorded in books and evidence, and decided to calculate the timely tax base by the method as stated in the judgment of the court below, and then impose an occasional imposition of various amounts of tax in the statement of the judgment below after deducting the amount already paid by the plaintiff from the amount already paid by the plaintiff. However, in calculating the tax base as above, the court below confirmed that the part of the revenue of the defendant's recognition in excess of the amount of the actual loan was made without any grounds, and determined that the part of the defendant's tax disposition in this case exceeding the part recognized by the court below is unlawful.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding or decision of the court below is just, and there is no violation of evidence such as the theory of lawsuit.

The issue is groundless.

With respect to the second ground:

Article 1 (1) 4 of the former Goods Tax Act provides that articles of taxation shall be self-processed, liquid, liquid, and refined. Article 1 (1) 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that articles of taxation shall include articles of self-help, melting, melting, melting, Royin, roin, solution, solution, stalth, powder, liquid, etc., and salivous, vegetable, nutrition, rainfall, rainfall, strongness, lavel, recovery, or piracy, and (b) provides that articles of taxation shall be deemed as articles of taxation, and it shall be determined that articles of this case, melting, melting, melting, melting, melting and ing are articles of taxation without physical or chemical processing, and shall not be deemed as articles of melting, melting, melting or subdividing, and shall not be deemed as articles of taxation by the Minister of Health and Welfare, and shall not be deemed as articles of melting or subdividing within the prescribed form of melting, physical or melting, etc.

The above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the old goods tax law and its Enforcement Decree.

The issue is groundless.

With respect to the third point:

This paper argues that even if the above melting sugar et al. are not subject to the taxation of the goods tax, the plaintiff recognizes that they are subject to the taxation of the goods tax and paid the prescribed goods tax. Thus, in light of the comparison principle of the principle of no taxation without law, the court below's decision to the same purport is just and acceptable.

All the arguments are without merit, and this appeal is dismissed. 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 Ahn Byung-soo (Presiding Justice)