AA was issued a false tax invoice in collusion with JJ, etc. on March 28, 2013.

In spite of a non-prosecution disposition due to lack of evidence to acknowledge such fact, such fact shall be known.

In light of the fact that there was no negligence on the part of the Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs are subject to the disposition.

the other party to the transaction was aware that the other party is not JJ or that the other party to the transaction was not a party to the transaction.

It is true that there was a need to investigate who is an agent, even though it was necessary to do so.

It is reasonable to view that there was negligence without examining the Plaintiffs’ above assertion. Therefore, all of the grounds for appeal are justified.

shall not be effective.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Won, 58,745,520 won for the first period of 2010, and value-added tax for plaintiffs BB for the second period of 2009

Sector 49,019,700 won, and 33,783,670 won for the first term of 2010 shall be revoked.

A. From November 1, 1989, Plaintiff A operates “HH in the O-O of the Magdong-dong, Magdong-dong, Ma-O, and Plaintiff B, from January 1, 1995, 'III in the O-O-O of the O-O of the Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Dong-dong.

B. The Plaintiffs received transit tax invoices from the Gwangjuan Bank Co., Ltd., Ltd., the 2009 and the 1st century in 2010 (hereinafter “JJ”) and received the following tax invoices (hereinafter “each of the instant tax invoices”), and the Defendant deducted the supply value under each of the instant tax invoices from the input tax amount when filing the return of value-added tax for the second and 209 years in 2009 and 10 years in 2010.

C. Since then, the Director of the Daejeon Regional Tax Office, the Director of the Dobong District Tax Office, as a result of the investigation into JJ and KK (hereinafter “JJ”) conducted by the JJ and KK, and notified the Defendant of the data for taxation.

D. Accordingly, on March 4, 2013, the Defendant decided to deduct the input tax amount for each of the instant tax invoices that the Plaintiff received from J, etc. on the ground that they were false tax invoices. On March 4, 2013, the Defendant issued a revised notice of the Value-Added Tax at KRW 49,019,700, KRW 33,783,670 for the second period of 209, KRW 82,593,240, KRW 520 for the second period of 209, KRW 58,520 for the first period of 2010, KRW 49,019, KRW 700 for the first period of 2010, and KRW 33,783,670 for the first period of 2010 (hereinafter referred to as “each disposition”). However, the Plaintiffs dissatisfied with this request and filed a request for adjudication on April 18, 2013, including evidence Nos. 31 through 615, and 5.

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

In light of the following circumstances, the Plaintiffs’ respective dispositions of this case are unlawful, as there are special circumstances under which they were not negligent for not knowing that they were not actual suppliers under each tax invoice of this case.

① The Plaintiffs traded with JJ, etc. through CCC, and confirmed whether they are normal business operators, such as petroleum sales business (general agency), business registration certificate, representative director’s certificate, certificate of personal seal impression, corporate register, deposit passbook, etc., and confirmed that they are normal business operators through the National Tax Service’s Home Tech Services. CCC was confirmed as employees by telephone at the head office.

② From October 2008, the Government revoked the Pool system by permitting the horizontal trade of petroleum products. Since the general agency is lower than 30 to 50 won per liter than staticly similar, the Plaintiffs did not doubt at all the end of the CCC that the Plaintiffs would supply light oil at a low level.

③ The Plaintiffs received and confirmed the shipment slips from time to time, and received the trade specifications and tax invoices sent by mail or letter after real transactions, and deposited the oil price into the legal account of JJ, etc.

④ The Plaintiffs are free to choose to freely choose to trade as the conversion volume and the shipment volume taking into account temperature, etc., and the Plaintiffs were supplied with oil due to the ex-factory quantity even when they trade with KKK Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Moo Bank”). ⑤ Plaintiff AA was suspected of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act in relation to the instant case, but was issued a non-prosecution disposition on the grounds that there was no evidence that there was no evidence to acknowledge that there was a conspiracy with the luminous company, etc.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) findings of J as to JJ

A) On January 4, 2008, JJ opened a place of business in the luminous area, Jeonnam on the day of February 4, 2008, and was an oil wholesaler that moved into the place of business in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon (OOOOO) and was closed ex officio on April 30, 2010.

B) ADD recorded as a representative director on the corporate register stated that, upon receiving a tax investigation, it merely received wages from the actual operator EE and gave the instructions to the accounting officer according to the instructions, and that it is ambiguous to the actual buyer or the actual buyer.

C) The FF et al., who is oil transporter, testified that he left oil in a rooftop storage registered as the storage place by the JJ upon undergoing a tax investigation, but it is not confirmed that he or she had left oil in a long-term closed state with the office of the petitioner O-5 at the office of the State Council (O-5).

D) NN and OO Co., Ltd., NM as the main source of oil purchase by JJ and the remainder of its purchase offices, all of which were verified as the so-called data that falsely issues tax invoices without real transactions.

E) The amount of oil transferred to the account of the JJ, including the Plaintiff, was immediately transferred to the account of the JJ, and the Plaintiff and other parties showed abnormal financial flow, such as full withdrawal of cash after the transfer to the account of MM, etc.

F) On August 10, 2011, the Director of the Daejeon Regional Tax Office decided that the JJ had issued and received tax invoices falsely without real transactions, and filed a complaint against the JJ and the representative director DD to the prosecution for the charge of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act. DD was sentenced to the imprisonment of eight months (Korean Government District Court Decision 2011No1692, Nov. 17, 201) due to the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and appealed, but on November 17, 2011, the dismissal judgment was sentenced (the same Court Decision 2011No1692, Nov. 25, 201), and the above judgment became final and conclusive on November 25, 2011.

A) On October 1, 2009, KK registered its business with the place of business of Suwon-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul as the place of business, and made a report on discontinuance of business on May 3, 2010 on the ground of a business failure on May 3, 2010, without reporting purchase amounting to KRW 22 million and sales amounting to KRW 18.4 billion as the value-added tax for the first period of value-added tax in 2009 and the first period in 2009 and 2010.

B) KK’s above place of business is an office of 8 square meters and only one female employee who is frequently replaced with the office of 8 square meters and did not have other employees. In addition, KK leased the oil storage tank of the PPP Co., Ltd. located in Pyeongtaek-si OO in Pyeongtaek-si, but it did not actually use the storage tank or pay rent after the date of the contract.

다) KKK가 유류 매입처라고 신고한 QQQ주유소, RRR주유소 등은 모두 자료상으로 고발되었고, KKK가 다른 정유사로부터 유류를 매입한 사실은 확인되지 않으며, KKK는 유류를 운반한 운반기사를 통해 출하전표를 교부하지 않고 사후에 우편 등으로 교부하였다.

D) According to the financial transactions from September 2009 to May 2010 by KK, approximately KRW 86.4 billion was deposited from 100 sales offices, including the Plaintiff, to the corporate account of KK, and KRW 86.4 billion was deposited. After the deposit, the immediately deposited KRW 84.9 billion was divided into 30 accounts of RR Energy Co., Ltd., and the remainder was divided into KRW 10 million to KRW 20 million.

E) Meanwhile, the RR Energy Co., Ltd. also deposited 38.1 billion won from KK divided into a small amount (15.0 million won to 19.0 million won) and transferred 90 billion won to the Z of the OO station by data merchants. The data merchants transferred 13.7 billion won to the Z of the OO station, and withdrawn the remainder in cash in a tent, Daegu, or Changwon, which is not related to the location of the corporation.

F) KV 2: (1) KK 2: (2) K 1: (3) K 2, K 2, K 1: (3) K 2, K 1: (2) K 2, K 2, K 1: (3) K 2, K 1: (3) K 2, K 1: (4) K 2, K 2, K 2 and K 1: (3) K 2, K 1: (3) K 2, K 2, K 200, K 1: (3) K 2, K 2, K 200, K 1: (4) K 2, K 2, K 1, K 200, K 1, K 200, K 2, K 200, K 1, K 200, K 200, K 3, K 21, K 200, K 200, K 21.

C) KR was traded with JJ, etc. through the CCC introduced through GCC. While CCC changed its workplace from JJ to KK for a few months, KR continued to engage in a transaction without any particular measure other than receiving documents from CCC related to K and making confirmation calls at its head office.

D) From among the shipment slips received from JJ, the plaintiffs did not have any 'day serial number, temperature, and density' in the form of the shipment slips received from JJ, and some of the shipment slips are written by the date of shipment and the name of the business parties, and only stated that the place of shipment is 'JJ' of 'JJ' of 'JJ' of 'JJ', and it is not known at all whether the oil has been shipped in any area. ② The shipment slips received from KK are serial numbers, tank number, temperature, and density, and part of the shipment slips are prepared to have the date of shipment and the place of delivery, and only 'KKK' of the shipment price is written to have the place of shipment in any area.

E) Generally, in the event of oil transaction, the buyer pays the price after confirming the storage of the oil, and receives the shipment slips on the date of receipt of the oil. In light of the details of transactions between the Plaintiffs and JJ, there were several cases where the settlement date was earlier than the date of shipment on the shipment slip as shown in the attached list.

F) The Plaintiff was supplied with oil from the JJ in the Second Period of 2009 and from KK in the First Period of 2010, with the place of business in Daejeon. Despite the change in the location of the supplier and the place of business as above, the supplier of the oil was identical to WW or the level of commercialization. The Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the grounds for recognition, each entry in Gap’s 3 through 14, 16 through 19, 21, and Eul’s 2 through 6, 8, 11 (including each number), and the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

D. Determination

1) Unless there is any special circumstance that the actual supplier and the supplier on the tax invoice are unaware of the name of the tax invoice and that there is no negligence on the part of the supplier, the input tax amount cannot be deducted or refunded, and that there is no negligence on the supplier’s failure to know of the above fact in the above name should be proven by the party claiming the deduction or refund of the input tax amount (see Supreme Court Decision 201Du2695, Mar. 29, 201). Therefore, the Plaintiff’s failure to know that each of the tax invoices of this case delivered by JJ, etc. were false and not negligent, as to whether the Plaintiff did not know of the fact that it was the actual supplier’s purchase of oil, the Plaintiffs are insufficient to recognize that there was no other evidence to acknowledge the fact that the Plaintiff did not know of the fact that the Plaintiff was the actual supplier’s purchase of the oil in question, and that there was no other evidence to prove that the Plaintiff did not know of the current status of the supply of the oil in Seoul, including the sale of the oil in advance market price.