자료상으로부터 수취한 세금계산서에 대한 매입세액 불공제 및 손금불산입의 적정여부[국승]
National High Court Decision 2007J 1803 (O. 22, 2008)
Non-deduction of input tax amount and appropriateness of non-deductible of tax invoice received from data
If, as a tax invoice received from the data, the nominal owner of the tax invoice was aware that the tax invoice was false, the input tax amount cannot be deducted, and if there was an actual cost disbursement, the taxpayer must prove it.
The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.
Article 16 of the Value-Added Tax Act
Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Purport of Claim
"The defendant's imposition of KRW 22,310,00 of value-added tax for the second period of March 2, 2001 and corporate tax for the year 2001 against the plaintiff on March 2, 2007 (referred to as "the defendant's statement on March 4, 2007" seems to be written in writing) is revoked," and the reasons are as follows.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The plaintiff is a company established on January 24, 2001 for the purpose of civil engineering, construction business, etc. (the name of the company was changed from ○○ Development to ○○, Inc. on September 6, 2004), 50,000 won for supply price of October 30, 201 from ○○ Resource Industry (hereinafter referred to as “Nonindicted Company”); 25,000,000 won for supply price of November 30, 201; 25,000,000 won for supply price of 20,000,000 won for supply price of 25,00,000 won for supply price of 20,000,000 won for supply price of 20,000 won for sale, and 20,000,000 won for each purchase tax invoice for 20,000 won for the purpose of deducting the above amount as the total input tax amount for 20,000.
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The plaintiff's assertion
"The tax invoice of this case was issued in the name of the non-party company because the plaintiff was supplied with H-beam2 (hereinafter referred to as "the material of this case") at the construction site of ○○○○-dong and ○○○○ apartment building (hereinafter referred to as "the material of this case") from red ○○○-si, and was issued in the name of the non-party company (the plaintiff paid the price of the material of this case to red ○○○○ on August 7, 2002). Thus, the disposition of this case should be revoked."
Article 16 (Tax Invoice)
Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)
Article 19 (Scope of Deductible Expenses)
C. Determination
Unless there are special circumstances that the actual supplier and the supplier on the tax invoice are not aware of the fact that the supplier was unaware of the fact that the supplier was unaware of the fact that the supplier was unaware of the fact that the input tax invoice was issued, the input tax amount cannot be deducted or refundable at the time of the return of value-added tax. In a case where the taxpayer asserts that some of the expenses reported by the taxpayer are not actual expenses, the tax authority must prove that the purpose of the use of the expenses claimed by the taxpayer and the payment partner was significantly false, and that the taxpayer did not incur other expenses as the details of the return, and that there was another expense disbursement equivalent to the same amount as the other taxpayer alleged by the taxpayer, and that there was a different expense disbursement as the taxpayer did not constitute the same amount, so long as the taxpayer proves that the other party to the payment was false, and that there was no other expense disbursement equivalent to the amount as the details of the return, there is a need to prove that it is easy for the taxpayer
As to the instant case, there is no dispute between the parties that the other party to the payment of the expenses indicated in the instant tax invoice is false and the Plaintiff knew of such fact. The instant tax invoice is a tax invoice written differently from the fact that the Plaintiff was unable to deduct the input tax amount from the output tax amount at the time of filing a value-added tax return. The instant tax invoice is a tax invoice written differently from the fact that the Plaintiff submitted by the Plaintiff, and it is insufficient to recognize that the costs of the instant tax invoice included in the deductible expenses as of July 7, 2002 and August 2002 were the expenses incurred in supplying the instant materials from red ○○○ apartment Civil Construction Contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, as of May 30, 2001. There is no evidence to support otherwise.
3. Conclusion
Thus, the defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate, which deducts the tax invoice amount as input tax amount and excludes the non-deductible expenses. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.