자료상으로부터 수취한 세금계산서를 사실과 다른 세금계산서로 본 처분의 당부[국승]
Incheon District Court 2007Guhap3699 ( November 13, 2008)
National High Court Decision 2006J 4491 (Law No. 30, 2007)
The propriety of the disposition of this case in a false tax invoice received from the data
Although a tax invoice received from a person who was accused of the material was paid in advance in the previous year and received a tax invoice ex post facto, the details of such advance payment are not stated in the advance account of the previous year’s settlement of accounts, and thus, the time of supply, etc. can be viewed as a tax invoice different from the facts.
The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposition of value-added tax of 8,074,130 won for the plaintiff on October 2, 2006, value-added tax of 2004, value-added tax of 6,706,150 won for the second year of 2004, and corporate tax of 23,904,850 won for the year of 2004 shall be revoked.
This court's explanation on this case is the same as the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the court uses "Article 17 (2) 1-2" of the first island judgment "Article 17 (2) 1-2" as "Article 17 (2) 1-2". Thus, this court cites it as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of the first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.