(a) Whether any air conditioner, carpet and carpet are excluded from the special consumption tax, which are attached to a passenger car excluded from the special consumption tax and form a component thereof;

(b) Whether a carpet or carpet, which is attached to a car excluded from the special consumption tax with approval for taking out without paying the special consumption tax, is subject to special consumption tax;

A. Under the principle of no taxation without law, the interpretation of tax laws and regulations must be strict, and expanded interpretation or analogical interpretation shall not be permitted, and even though there is no provision that the above goods are naturally attached to a passenger car excluded from the taxable object and are essential constituent parts thereof, the statutory interpretation that the above goods should be excluded from the taxable object in light of the purport of proof that the above goods should not be excluded from the taxable object, solely on the ground that they are essential constituent parts thereof.

B. The carpets and carpets attached to a car excluded from the special consumption tax with approval of transfer without payment of the special consumption tax are not used as raw materials to manufacture and process "taxable goods" under Article 19 (3) 6 of the Enforcement Decree of the Special Consumption Tax Act, but rather used as raw materials to manufacture and process the above car excluded from the taxable objects. Thus, it cannot be deemed as being used for "the minor purpose" under Article 14 (2) of the Special Consumption Tax Act, and thus the special consumption tax should be collected.

(a) Article 18 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 1 of the Special Consumption Tax Act, Article 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Special Consumption Tax Act, Article 14 (2) of the Special Consumption Tax Act, Article 19 (3) 6 of the Enforcement Decree of the

A. Supreme Court Decision 83Nu213 delivered on December 27, 1983, 83Nu680 delivered on June 26, 1984

Attorney Lee Jae-chul et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

The director of the North Incheon National Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 84Gu1196 delivered on August 28, 1985

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

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the second ground for appeal:

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below, based on the adopted evidence, acknowledged the following facts: the passenger automobiles sold by the plaintiff to the officer of the Armed Forces at the time of the original adjudication from January 1, 1982 to June 1983, which the plaintiff sold to the officer of the Armed Forces General-grade (this case's car) are naturally attached to all passenger cars manufactured by the plaintiff; and the air-conditioning machine is attached to the plaintiff's car type, which is sold by the plaintiff, only to the air-conditioning machine, but it is attached to the Lecoon, which is a bar, and it is anticipated to attach an air-conditioning machine from the beginning of the design to the bar, and it is impossible to deliver the goods that are not attached to the goods that are not arbitrarily attached to the goods that are not attached to the air-conditioning (this case's goods) at the request of the consumer, and in light of the records, the court below's finding of facts and its judgment is justified, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

2. As to ground of appeal No. 1

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that it is reasonable to exclude the goods of this case from taxable items because the Special Consumption Tax Act excludes the passenger cars sold to the general-grade officer of the National Armed Forces under certain conditions from taxable items, considering the purchaser's status and the necessity of duty. In light of the legislative intent of the Special Consumption Tax Act, although there is no provision on the exemption of taxation for the goods of this case which are essentially attached to the passenger cars in attached Table 1 of Article 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, but there is a provision on the exclusion of the passenger cars from taxable items, the goods of this case should be deemed to be subject to special consumption tax separately for the goods of this case which are necessarily attached to the automobiles of this case while exempting the taxation for the passenger cars from taxation for the passenger cars, and therefore, it is reasonable to exclude the goods of this case from taxable items like the automobiles of this case ("tax exemption" in the above statement, but because the provisions of the above attached Table 1 concerning the object of taxation are not a provision on the exemption of taxation, the expression above should be deemed to mean "the meaning of taxation."

Therefore, it is reasonable to see whether the instant goods can be interpreted as excluded from taxable objects such as the instant car sold to general-class officers of the National Armed Forces.

Under the principle of no taxation without law, the interpretation of tax laws and regulations must be strict, while expanded interpretation or analogical interpretation is not allowed (see Supreme Court Decision 83Nu213 delivered on December 27, 1983; Supreme Court Decision 83Nu680 delivered on June 26, 1984).

However, Article 1(2)1 of the Special Consumption Tax Act provides that goods subject to taxation of special consumption tax include air control apparatus, type 2 subparag. 5 of Article 1(2), passenger cars under class 2 subparag. 7, and class 4 subparag. 1, Article 1(5) of the same Act provides that the items and types of taxable goods shall be prescribed by the Presidential Decree, and Article 1(5) of the same Act provides that the items of taxable goods under Article 1(5) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act shall be as specified in the attached Table 1. Article 1(2)7 main sentence and item (a) of the attached Table 1 provides that the items of taxable goods under Article 1(2)7 of the same Act shall be purchased for the purpose of performing the duties of the officer belonging to the National Armed Forces among passenger cars that are taxable goods, and that the Minister of National Defense shall not be included in taxable goods.

On the other hand, air conditioners, carpets, and carpets are specified as taxable goods as seen above, and there is no provision about the exclusion from taxable goods.

Thus, although there is no provision that the goods of this case are excluded from taxable goods, the legal interpretation of the court below that the goods of this case should be excluded from taxable goods in light of the purport of legislation that the passenger cars are naturally attached to a passenger car excluded from taxable goods and are its essential constituent part, shall not be permitted in light of the above legal principles as seen earlier, because it is an extended interpretation or analogical interpretation of the provision of Item 2 Item 7 (a) of attached Table 1.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that the goods of this case are excluded from taxable goods is unlawful in interpreting the law in violation of the principle of no taxation without law. Therefore, the argument that points this out is reasonable.

3. Regarding the grounds of appeal Nos. 3 and 4 (the air control period of this case does not affect the conclusion of the judgment even if the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle, and thus, the carpets of this case and carpets of this case do not make specific decisions as to the requirements for deduction under Article 20 (2) 2 of the Special Consumption Tax Act, the requirements for non-collection under Article 14 (1) 6 of the same Act, and the plaintiff's assertion that the carpets of this case fall under the requirements for non-collection under Article 14 (1) 6 of the same Act. Thus, the grounds of appeal Nos. 3 and 4 of the same ground of appeal can not be viewed as legitimate grounds of appeal, and if the special consumption tax is

First of all, Article 20 (2) 2 of the Special Consumption Tax Act provides that the taxable goods manufactured and processed with the taxable goods taken out from the manufacturing place or bonded area as raw materials shall be deducted from the tax amount to be paid or to be collected. However, even if the above air control period is recognized as raw materials of the automobile of this case, it is clear in the text of the law that the automobile of this case does not constitute "the case where the special consumption tax is exempted" under the Special Consumption Tax Act, which is clearly separate from the special consumption tax, for the reason of rational interpretation in accordance with the purpose of legislation, it cannot be allowed under the principle of no taxation without law. Thus, it cannot be deducted from the tax amount to be collected at the time of the purchase of the above air control period.

Next, Article 14 (1) 6 of the Special Consumption Tax Act provides that "the special consumption tax shall not be levied on the above carpets and carpets purchased by the plaintiff with approval for transfer without tax payment, and Article 19 (3) 6 and (4) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that "the special consumption tax shall not be imposed on the case where the special consumption tax shall not be imposed on the above carpets and carpets, and the special consumption tax shall not be imposed on the case where it is recognized that there is no obstacle to the preservation or enforcement of the special consumption tax, and further, Article 19 (3) 6 and Article 19 (4) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provide that "the case of taking them out to another manufacturing place for manufacturing and processing taxable goods shall be permitted to be taken out without tax payment with the approval of the head of the competent tax office, and Article 14 (2) of the same Act provides that "the special consumption tax shall not be imposed on the goods which were taken out without tax payment but not on the special consumption tax for manufacturing and processing goods."

Therefore, the illegality of the judgment of the court below above has influenced the conclusion of the judgment.

4. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)