1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: "employee subject to this case" under Section 5 of Chapter 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be "employee subject to this case"; "(general, food, accommodation, transportation expenses)" under Section 11 of the 8th judgment shall be "(general, food, transportation expenses, and transportation expenses)"; "(general, food, accommodation, and transportation expenses)"; however, employees subject to this case shall be deemed to have received general travel expenses at the time of a business trip within a workplace pursuant to Article 9 (2) of the Rules on Payment of this case. However, the employees subject to this case shall add the same contents as stated in Section 2 of the 4th judgment under Sections 21 and 12, under Sections 6 through 9 of the 8th judgment of the court of first instance, and Article 106 through 11 of the 10th judgment to 9th judgment, and the part of the 10th judgment shall be deleted as stated in Section 2 of the 9 of the Civil Procedure Act and the 10th judgment.

2. 추가하는 부분 【제4쪽 제21행 아래에 추가하는 부분】 ▣ 국세기본법 제18조(세법 해석의 기준 및 소급과세의 금지) ③ 세법의 해석이나 국세행정의 관행이 일반적으로 납세자에게 받아들여진 후에는 그 해석이나 관행에 의한 행위 또는 계산은 정당한 것으로 보며, 새로운 해석이나 관행에 의하여 소급하여 과세되지 아니한다.

【Supplementary to the Second Instance】

D. As to the Plaintiff’s argument in the trial at the trial, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that “Although monthly travel expenses are subject to taxation, the Defendant’s imposition of income tax retroactively on monthly travel expenses for the past 30 years from the time of the KNK is unlawful as it violates the previous interpretation or practice of the tax authority on monthly travel expenses.”

Article 18(3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes.