2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 27,88,120 of the corporate tax for the year 2004 against the Plaintiff on June 16, 2009 is revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

The reasons why a member should explain this case are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the determination of the defendant's argument in the trial. Thus, this case is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional judgment;

The defendant asserts that the disposition of this case is lawful as it is under the general rule of 116-158, 11 of the Corporate Tax Act, which provides that a tax invoice issued under the name of another business operator and the actual transaction place in which it was in force at that time shall not be deemed as documentary evidence under Article 116(2) of the Corporate Tax Act. However, the general rule of the National Tax Service is merely an administrative rule that instructs the criteria for interpretation and enforcement of the tax law within the tax authority, and it is not a law that has the effect of binding the court or the people (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Du5611, Feb. 8, 2007). Thus, even if the disposition of this case was imposed under the general rule of the above basic rule, it cannot be said that it is legitimate merely because the above

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case is unlawful, and the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Yellow-gu (Presiding Judge)