The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Busan District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Value-added tax is imposed on a general taxi transport business entity, who is a business entity, and thus, the amount of value-added tax reduced under Article 106-7 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 10285, May 14, 2010) belongs to the general taxi transport business entity, who is a payment obligor, and the general taxi transport business entity does not acquire a private legal right against the amount of value-added tax reduced.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 2010Do3207 Decided March 15, 2012; 2014Da63087 Decided June 19, 2017). Such a legal doctrine likewise applies even after the amendment of Article 106-7 by Act No. 10285 on May 14, 2010 (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da13689, Oct. 26, 2017). 2. Examining the foregoing legal doctrine and records, the Plaintiffs, who are the taxi drivers of the Defendant, who are general taxi transport business entities, are not entitled to directly claim the amount of value-added tax relief against the Defendant, and the Plaintiffs, who are the taxi drivers of the Defendant, can obtain the benefits from the reduction of value-added tax by individually or through an agreement with the Defendant through a trade union.

Nevertheless, the lower court, solely based on its stated reasoning, accepted the Plaintiffs’ claim by deeming that the Plaintiffs could directly claim the amount of value-added tax reduced against the Defendant.

In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the subject of attribution of the reduced amount of value-added tax under the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, thereby adversely affecting the Supreme Court precedents.

The ground of appeal assigning this error is justified.

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.