부가가치세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On October 10, 2013, a corporation A (hereinafter “Bankruptcy Company”) was a corporation for the purpose of fire-fighting equipment construction business, etc., and the rehabilitation procedure was discontinued or finalized (Seoul District Court 2013 hap21), and on March 18, 2014, the Plaintiff was appointed as a bankruptcy trustee of the Bankruptcy Company.
(The District Court 2014Hahap11). (b)
On July 2, 2012, before the bankruptcy is declared, the bankruptcy company entered into a contract with C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) to accept two tools of construction works (hereinafter “instant construction”) within the Sejong-si District D, and completed the instant construction work on February 28, 2014.
C. On March 18, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an application for a continuous business license with the “the input price (as of February 28, 2014)” attached to the Bankruptcy Court, stating the progress status of 13 projects, including the instant construction works, until completion by each nationwide field. The court granted permission on March 19, 2014.
On April 2014, the Plaintiff planned and reported value-added tax of KRW 168,79,69 for the first term portion of value-added tax for the bankrupt company in 2014. On July 25, 2014, the Plaintiff reported and paid value-added tax of KRW 191,962,288 for the first term portion of value-added tax in 2014.
E. The Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff omitted sales revenue of KRW 1 billion to C when filing a return on value-added tax; and (b) determined to increase the value-added tax for the first period of January 2014 as KRW 175,415,00 (including additional tax; hereinafter “value-added tax”); and (c) notified the Plaintiff of the correction and notification on June 5, 2019.
(F) The Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a request for national tax review with the National Tax Service, but was dismissed on December 11, 2019.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Plaintiff’s instant disposition should be revoked on the following grounds.