컴퓨터 및 주변기기 매입관련 위장매입 세금계산서[국승]
Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap47364 ( December 11, 2009)
Cho High Court Decision 2008west0439 (No. 17, 2008)
A disguised purchase tax invoice for computers and peripheral devices;
It is true that the other party issued a disguised tax invoice, and the representative is prosecuted as a charge, and thus constitutes a false tax invoice.
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The decision of the first instance is revoked. The decision of the defendant's rejection against the plaintiff's application for the correction of value-added tax on October 16, 2007 shall be revoked.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning of the judgment of this court is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following addition or dismissal. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 402 of the Civil Procedure Act.
▣ 제1심 판결문 2쪽 13째 줄의 "위 통고 취지에 따라" 다음에 "위장매출거래에 대하여는 가산세를 추가하고, 위장매입거래에 대하여는 해당매입거래를 공제함으로써 그 부가가치세 및 그 가산세를 추가하는 내용으로"를 추가하고, 14째줄의 "부가가치세 171,653,923원을"을 "부가가치세를"로 고친다.
▣ 제1심 판결문 5쪽 8째 줄의 "한 점" 다음에 아래의 판단을 추가한다.
[Plaintiff] The Plaintiff asserts that the representative director of the Plaintiff company, who was subject to a long tax investigation, prepared the above confirmation document, etc. without any reply and pressure of the public official belonging to the Defendant, is different from the fact. However, barring special circumstances, such as where the above confirmation document, etc. was drafted compulsorily against the will of the Plaintiff, or it is difficult to take it as evidence for specific facts due to lack of its content, etc., it cannot be rejected without permission (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Du2560, Dec. 6, 2002). The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone cannot acknowledge the above special circumstances, and thus, the Plaintiff’s above assertion cannot be accepted).
▣ 제1심 판결문 5쪽 11째 줄의 "공소사실로 기소된 점"을 "공소사실로 기소되어 제1심(부산지방법원2008고단5358 등 조세범처벌법위반)에서 유죄판결을 선고받은 점"으로 고친다.
▣ 제1심 판결문 6쪽 6째줄 의 믿는 증거에 "을 제15호증의 1 내지 3의 각 기재"를 추가하고, 9째 줄의 "봄이 상당하고" 다음에 "(자신은 항상 거래의 주체가 누구인지를 분명하게 확인하고 거래했다고 당심에서 원고가 주장하고 있는 점까지 고려하면 더욱 그러하다)"를 추가한다.
2. Conclusion
The judgment of the court of first instance must dismiss the plaintiff's claim. This conclusion is same, and the plaintiff's appeal is just and there is no ground for appeal of the plaintiff.