logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
arrow
대법원 1983. 6. 28. 선고 82누142 판결
[행정처분취소(차량취득세과세처분)][공1983.9.1.(711),1192]
Main Issues

A. Tax statutes and the principle of strict interpretation

B. Whether new construction of manufacturing facilities of ready-mixed in the existing mentmentor factory constitutes extension of the factory (negative)

Summary of Judgment

A. At the request of a tax legalism, the interpretation and application of a tax law should be strict, and no analogical interpretation or expanded interpretation shall be permitted.

B. A factory subject to heavy taxation under Article 47-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Local Tax Act (No. 221 of the Ordinance of the Ministry of Home Affairs No. 221 of Jan. 12, 1977), which is listed in the mentor manufacturing business, but it cannot be widely interpreted that the manufacturing business of ready-mixed is included in the mentor manufacturing business. Thus, the extension of a factory under Article 112(3) of the Local Tax Act cannot be deemed to include the additional construction of ready-mixed manufacturing facilities in the existing mentor manufacturing business, and the acquisition of ready-mixed vehicles for the purpose of the manufacture and sale of the above ready-mixed manufacturing business does not constitute the acquisition of taxable objects for the business to extend the factory.

[Reference Provisions]

A. Article 95 of the Constitution, Article 18 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Articles 110-2(2), 112(3), and 112(4) of the Local Tax Act, Article 47-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Local Tax Act (No. 221 of the Ordinance of the Ministry of Home Affairs No. 12, 1977)

Plaintiff-Appellant

Dongyang Industrial Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellee and one other

Defendant-Appellee

Attorney Han-dae, Counsel for the defendant-appellant of Busan Special Metropolitan City

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu High Court Decision 80Gu62 delivered on February 28, 1981

Text

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

Reasons

The Plaintiff’s attorney’s grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, since the plaintiff company imported 5 ready-mixed vehicles from Japan on August 19, 1978 through the Incheon Customs office, completed the registration of 9.12 of that year, and voluntarily paid the acquisition tax to 3rd-gun where the plaintiff company's factory is located, 10.2 of that year also belongs to Busan Special Metropolitan City where the plaintiff company's factory is located and registered for transfer of that vehicle. Accordingly, the defendant applied heavy taxation rate to "where it acquires business-taxable goods to extend factories in a large city" under Article 112 (3) of the Local Tax Act and applied heavy taxation rate to "where it is acquired for the extension of factories in a large city" and then excluded 119,404,492 won from acquisition tax for the plaintiff company as of September 10, 1979 and added it to 19,000,000 Busan Special Metropolitan City's previous manufacturing facilities and 17,000,000,000,000.

However, Article 112 (3) of the Local Tax Act provides that the acquisition tax rate for acquiring any taxable object for business to newly build or extend a factory in the large city prescribed by Presidential Decree shall be 500/100 of the tax rate under paragraph (1).

Article 110-2 (2) of the Local Tax Act provides that Article 110-2 (3) shall apply mutatis mutandis to the case of paragraph (4). Article 110-2 (2) of the same Act provides that the scope of and applicable standards for factories shall be determined by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Meanwhile, according to the kinds of factories in the annexed Table 3 of Article 47-2 of the Enforcement Rule of the Local Tax Act (No. 12 January 12, 1977), which are in force at the time of the preexisting mentor factory, with manufacturing facilities within the preexisting mentor factory, among factories in the annexed Table 26, the pre-existing mentor manufacturing business is listed in the pre-existing moror manufacturing business, but the pre-existing mororor manufacturing business cannot be seen as an expansion of the pre-existing moror manufacturing business (except for petroleum and coal products) of the pre-existing 3rd mor manufacturing business.

Therefore, the court below erred in interpreting the law on the scope of a factory subject to heavy taxation and affected the judgment. Therefore, it is reasonable to discuss this issue.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court which is the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices O Sung-sung(Presiding Justice)

arrow