실물거래 없는 가공세금계산서 해당여부[국승]
Whether it constitutes a processing tax invoice without real transactions
The sales tax invoice was issued and issued only in the name of the person who directly produced and exported the goods as raw materials, and the purchase tax invoice was received without any real transaction, and the disposition imposing the additional tax on the purchase tax invoice by the seller is legitimate.
Article 22 of the Value-Added Tax Act
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
1. Whether the procedure of the instant disposition is unlawful
The main text of Article 81-6(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 8139 of Dec. 30, 2006; hereinafter referred to as the "Act") provides that when a tax official investigates account books, documents, and other articles for the purpose of the investigation on national taxes, he/she shall notify the taxpayer subject to the investigation of the items of investigation, reason for investigation and other matters as prescribed by the Presidential Decree seven days prior to the commencement of the investigation. However, the proviso provides that the same shall not apply to cases where it is deemed that the purpose of investigation may not be achieved
In light of the records, the tax official's tax investigation of this case against the plaintiff is an investigation of an offence case, and the tax official's failure to give prior notice while conducting a tax investigation against the plaintiff seems to have been subject to the above proviso, and there is no illegality in the process of tax investigation against the plaintiff.
In addition, the main sentence of Article 81-7 of the Act provides that when a tax official completes a field investigation for taxation disposition prescribed by the Presidential Decree, such as an investigation of an offence case, and an investigation for determination or correction of corporate tax, he shall notify the taxpayer of the results thereof in writing. However, the proviso provides that the same shall not apply to cases prescribed by the Presidential Decree, such as closure of business. Article 63-7 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 19893, Feb. 28, 2007) provides that "cases prescribed by Presidential Decree" in the proviso of Article 81-7 of the Act refers
According to the records, while a tax official completed an investigation of a tax offense case against the plaintiff on April 18, 2002, the plaintiff was already reported on February 1, 2002 by the competent ○○, an employee, and the defendant confirmed that the employee reported the business closure of the plaintiff and notified the plaintiff that the business closure was revoked as a result of the investigation of the violation against the plaintiff. Thus, the tax official's failure to notify the plaintiff of the result of the investigation under the main sentence of Article 81-7 of the Act is in violation of the proviso and the procedure is not erroneous.
Therefore, the court below's decision that there is no procedural error in the procedure to revoke the disposition of the value-added tax in this case is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence or the legal principles as to the tax investigation procedure.
2. Whether the disposition of this case is unlawful
In light of the records, it is proper for the court below to maintain the judgment of the first instance court that the tax invoice issued between the plaintiff and the non-party company is issued without any present supply or purchase, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence, contradiction in the reasons for the judgment, etc.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.