Whether an excessive deduction of the special consumption tax shall be paid additionally after receiving the refund of the special consumption tax amount.

In cases of exporting goods on which special consumption tax, etc. has been levied, the amount of special consumption tax, etc. already paid shall be refunded, and such reason constitutes a case where the amount calculated by deducting the amount from the initial value of supply under Article 59 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14471 of Dec. 31, 194), and thus, the amount equivalent to the special consumption tax refunded shall be deducted from the tax base of the value-added tax (purchase tax). In such a case, the portion equivalent to the amount equivalent to the special consumption tax, etc. refunded out of the value-added tax paid should be refunded after filing a revised tax return, and the person who purchased and exported the said goods shall make late the portion

Article 13 of the Value-Added Tax Act, Article 59 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14471 of December 31, 1994), Article 20(2)1 of the Special Consumption Tax Act

Supreme Court Decision 87Nu1095 Decided April 12, 198 (Gong1988, 853) Supreme Court Decision 87Nu1155 Decided June 28, 198 (Gong1988, 1123)

Seoul High Court Decision 200Na14888 decided May 2, 2002

Director of the District Office

Seoul High Court Decision 95Gu1219 delivered on July 21, 1995

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

In cases of exporting goods on which special consumption tax, etc. is levied, the amount of special consumption tax, etc. already paid shall be refunded, and such reason constitutes a case where the amount calculated by deducting the amount from the initial value of supply under Article 59 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 14471 of Dec. 31, 1994). Therefore, the amount equivalent to the special consumption

In such cases, the business operator who supplied the above goods shall obtain a return of modification on the portion equivalent to the amount equivalent to the special consumption tax, etc. refunded among the value-added tax paid, and the person who purchased and exported the above goods shall receive the revised tax invoice from the business operator and make late payment of the excess amount of the input tax already deducted.

The judgment below to the same purport is just, and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the tax base of value-added tax.

The precedents of party members asserted by the theory of lawsuit are not appropriate in this case.

There is no reason to discuss this issue.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)