Tax amount paid under Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

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

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur who operates a gas station under the trade name, "BB gas station" from 6518 to O on the O-site O.

B. The Plaintiff received the purchase tax invoice (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) equivalent to the total value of supply from the Seoul Gyeonggi Branch of Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “CCC Energy”) during the first taxable period of the value-added tax in January 2009, and deducted the input tax amount from the output tax amount, and reported and paid the value-added tax by deducting it from the output tax amount.

C. The director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office confirmed that CCC energy was issued without a real transaction during the taxable period from February 2, 2008 to February 2, 2009 and notified the Defendant of the fact that CCC energy was issued without a real transaction.

D. Accordingly, on August 1, 2012, the Defendant did not deduct the relevant input tax amount from the output tax amount by deeming the instant tax invoice as a false tax invoice, and did not recognize the said input tax amount as the necessary expenses of the global income tax against the Plaintiff, and notified the Plaintiff of the correction and notification of the amount of KRW 101,248,450 (including additional tax) for the first period of August 1, 2009, global income tax for the year 2009 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. On September 21, 2012, the Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal seeking revocation of each of the above dispositions with the Tax Tribunal. The Defendant, in relation to the disposition imposing global income tax, cannot be deemed to have received the relevant oil from CCC energy, but on September 28, 2012, revoked ex officio the disposition imposing global income tax on the Plaintiff on the ground that it is recognized that the sales and sales cost constituted the composition ratio, and the Plaintiff purchased and sold the oil. The Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding the disposition imposing global income tax on November 30, 2012, and dismissed the part concerning the instant disposition.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, 10, 13, 14, Eul evidence Nos. 2 and 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant disposition should be revoked on the grounds that it is unlawful for the following reasons.

(1) The instant tax invoice was prepared by reflecting the content of the actual transaction as it is, and thus, is not a false tax invoice.

(2) Even if it is assumed that the instant tax invoice for household affairs constituted a false tax invoice, the Plaintiff constitutes a bona fide trader.

B. Relevant statutes

/ former Value-Added Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 9915, Jan. 1, 2010)

Article 16 (Tax Invoice)

(1) Where an entrepreneur registered as a person liable for tax payment supplies goods or services, he/she shall issue an invoice stating the following matters (hereinafter referred to as "tax invoice") to the person who receives the supply, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, at the time specified in Article 9 (where Presidential Decree prescribes otherwise, the time specified otherwise by the Presidential Decree). In such cases, a tax invoice may be revised and issued as prescribed by Presidential Decree, in cases where any ground prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as error

1. Registration number, name or denomination of the businessman who provides;

2. Registration number of the person who receives;

3. Supply value and value-added tax;

4. Date of preparation.

5. Matters prescribed by Presidential Decree, other than those under subparagraphs 1 through 4.

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

(1) The amount of value-added taxes payable by an entrepreneur (hereinafter referred to as the "paid tax amount") shall be the amount computed by deducting the tax amount under each of the following subparagraphs (hereinafter referred to as the "in-house tax amount") from the tax amount on the goods and services supplied by him (hereinafter referred to as the "pro rata tax amount"): Provided, That in cases of an input tax amount exceeding

1. The tax amount for the supply of goods or services used or to be used for his own business;

2. The tax amount for the import of goods used or to be used for his own business; and

(2) The following input taxes shall not be deducted from the output tax amount:

1-2. An input tax amount where a tax invoice under Article 16 (1), (2), (4) and (5) is not delivered, or all or part of the matters to be entered under Article 16 (1) 1 through 4 (hereinafter referred to as "necessary matters to be entered") are not entered or entered differently from the fact on the delivered tax invoice: Provided, That the input tax amount in cases prescribed by Presidential Decree shall be excluded;

C. Determination

In light of the following circumstances that can be seen by adding up the overall purport of the pleadings to the respective statements in the facts of recognition as seen earlier, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 9, 12, 16, 17, Eul evidence Nos. 3, 5, and 6, the evidence alone presented by the defendant is insufficient to recognize the entries of the supplier as a tax invoice different from the facts, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

① From August 26, 2009 to December 31, 2009, the director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office conducted an investigation of suspected charge of petroleum material on the CCC energy by setting the investigation period from 2008 to 2009. As a result of the investigation, it is difficult to view CCC energy as a processing enterprise, insofar as CCC energy was less at a low ratio, so long as CCC energy was an enterprise that can not become a real transaction party.

② According to the records of the flow stock management system of the DD Co., Ltd., the transit stock of the BB gas station may be known to the effect that the Plaintiff was actually supplied with the quantity entered in the instant tax invoice. Moreover, the Plaintiff transferred the transaction amount stated in the tax invoice to the CCC for the said supplied quantity.

③ The Defendant revoked ex officio the imposition of global income tax by recognizing that the Plaintiff actually purchased and sold oil.

④ On October 26, 2010, the CCC’s head office and representative EE (FF prior to the opening of the name) stated that, under investigation conducted by the Daegu District Public Prosecutor’s Office on the suspicion of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, petroleum was purchased with non-data and supplied petroleum to its customers with non-data and received and issued a false tax invoice as necessary. The CCC stated that it was an YG. In fact, if the CCC energy purchased oil from a third party company, such as the KGG, and supplied the Plaintiff with the false tax invoice to keep the data related to the purchase, it is difficult to view that the party who traded the oil to be the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff did not have any transaction between the CCC and the Plaintiff, or that the instant tax invoice was issued without any real transaction.

Therefore, the defendant's disposition of this case is unlawful on the premise that the tax invoice of this case is a false tax invoice.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is decided as per Disposition by admitting it.