Whether it is an importation of the residue of the goods brought into the free export zone into the free export zone, whether the remaining goods are re-exported into the customs zone.

If waste goods, by-products, etc. accruing from a product process using goods as raw materials, which are brought in into a marina industry free export zone upon confirmation by the head of a customs office, are re-exported into a customs zone, it shall be deemed to seal the goods for which an export license has been obtained.

Articles 8, 9, 13, and 14 of the Act on the Establishment of Free Export Zones, Article 6 of the Regulations on the Management of Goods for Export and Import in Free Export Zones (Public Notice No. 10573)

North Korea Inc.

Head of Masan Customs Office

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The imposition of KRW 13,402,573 on July 9, 1975, which the Defendant had to make against the Plaintiff, shall be revoked.

The court costs are assessed against the defendant.

1. Determination on this Safety Defense

The defendant, since the plaintiff has already paid KRW 13,402,573 in the amount of customs duties of this case, the lawsuit in this case is unlawful because it has no interest in the lawsuit. Thus, the defendant's defense that the plaintiff has already paid the customs duties of this case is no dispute between the parties, but it is obvious by the statement of the complaint that the plaintiff seeks revocation on the ground that the defendant's disposition to impose customs duties of this case is illegal, since the lawsuit in this case is obviously obvious by the fact that the defendant's disposition to impose customs duties of this case is illegal. Thus, the defendant's defense is groundless.

2. Determination on this part:

According to the provisions of the former Customs Act, the plaintiff's entry of domestic goods into the free export zone into the free export zone from October 6, 1973 to October 21, 1974. The plaintiff's entry of domestic goods into the free export zone into the free export zone into the free export zone of the Republic of Korea is prohibited by the provisions of the former Customs Act for the purpose of 13,402,573 (including additional charges and additional charges) as well as 13,00 won for the plaintiff's entry into the free export zone of the Republic of Korea. According to the provisions of the former Customs Act for the purpose of this Act for the purpose of 1973, 207, the above new goods into the free export zone of the Republic of Korea shall be purchased within the free export zone of the Republic of Korea, and the new goods shall not be considered to be imported into the free export zone of the Republic of Korea, and the new goods shall not be considered to be imported into the free export zone of the Republic of Korea and thus, the former Customs Act for the purpose of 194.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of imposing the tax on this case is legitimate, and the plaintiff's claim on this case based on the premise that it is illegal, is dismissed, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost.

Judges Kim Young-young (Presiding Judge) and Lee Tae-tae Kim