beta
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.04.04 2016구합106086

부가가치세부과처분취소 등

Text

1. On December 1, 2015, the Defendant’s value-added tax for the Plaintiff on December 1, 2014, KRW 723,570,370, and KRW 2,014.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company engaged in the production of automobile parts, the processing and wholesale of scrap scrap scrap in the astronomical city of Y.

B. The Plaintiff received a tax invoice of KRW 4,138,945,070 in total from B during the first taxable period of the value-added tax in 2014, and received a tax invoice of KRW 516,473,670 in total from C during the second taxable period of the value-added tax in 2014 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant tax invoices”), and filed a return and payment of value-added tax after deducting each of the input tax amounts from the output tax amount.

C. After conducting a tax investigation on the Plaintiff from September 1, 2015 to October 10, 2015, the Defendant: (a) deemed each of the instant tax invoices as false tax invoices; and (b) did not deduct the input tax amount on each of the instant tax invoices from the output tax amount; (c) on December 1, 2015, the Defendant corrected and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 93,108,370 for value-added tax of KRW 1,23,570,370 for value-added tax for the year 2014; and (d) KRW 87,438,90 for value-added tax for the second year of 2014

(hereinafter “each disposition of this case”) D.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with each disposition of the instant case and filed a request for review with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on June 20, 2016, upon filing an objection on February 12, 2016, but the Commissioner of the National Tax Service dismissed all the Plaintiff’s request on September 9, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Even if the Plaintiff’s assertion B and C is not an actual supplier, the Plaintiff became aware of the substance thereof.

No person shall be deemed to have been unaware of such fact by negligence.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. One actual supplier as to whether the Plaintiff is a good faith or an negligence and another supplier on a tax invoice and another supplier on a tax invoice are entitled to deduct or refund the input tax amount, unless there are special circumstances to the contrary that the supplier was unaware of the fact of misrepresentation of the tax invoice and that there was no negligence.