beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2015.11.17 2014구합2278 (1)

부가가치세부과처분취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From June 11, 2007, the Plaintiff is an internal director of Company B (formerly: C Co., Ltd.; hereinafter “B”) that engages in construction business, heavy equipment leasing business, etc. as a target business, and operated a mid-term loan business with the trade name “E” from February 20, 2004 to July 8, 201.

B. On November 2012, the head of the Jinju Tax Office notified the Defendant of the taxation data that “the Plaintiff supplied equipment rental services of KRW 24,715,000 for the supply price of KRW 24,715,00 for the 2010 supply price of the 2010 supply price (excluding value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) to the 114,240,000 for the 20th anniversary of the 2010 supply price for the 2010 supply price for the 24,715,000 supply price, and issued the sales tax invoice in the name of G.”

C. Accordingly, the Defendant issued four copies of the tax invoice for Ilyang in the name of G (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) to the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff omitted sales of E, and notified the Plaintiff of the amount of value-added tax for the first period of February 3, 2014 (including additional tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) 22,596,670 won, and value-added tax for the second period of February 10, 2014.

After that, the defendant Na.

Of the taxation data described in paragraph (1), it was confirmed that the first supply price in 2010 was KRW 126,640,00, and the second supply price in 2010 was KRW 12,315,00, and that the second supply price in 2010 was KRW 2,394,316 on April 27, 2015, the amount of value-added tax for the second term in 2010 was reduced to KRW 2,394,316 on June 2, 2015 and the second revised notice was issued to the Plaintiff on June 2, 2015.

(2) In the disposition of imposition of value-added tax as of February 10, 2014, the part remaining after reduction as above, and the disposition of imposition of value-added tax as of February 3, 2014 and June 2, 2015, are deemed to be “instant disposition” (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff is dissatisfied with the disposition of value-added tax imposed on February 3, 2014 and February 10, 2014, and against the head of the competent tax office.