2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

A. On March 2, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a contract under which the two factories (hereinafter referred to as the “building”) were newly built on 10,500,000 - 00 - 00 - 000 - 000 - 000 - 2, and 2000 - up to May 10, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the “construction”) (hereinafter referred to as the “instant contract”). The Plaintiff’s tax invoices were 50,000,000 won for five tax invoices (hereinafter referred to as “the instant tax invoices”). The Plaintiff’s tax invoices were 50,000 won for five tax invoices, 00 won for five tax invoices, 00 won for five tax invoices (hereinafter referred to as “50,000 won for five tax invoices”) and 50,000 won for five tax invoices, 60.30,000 won for five tax invoices, 200,000 won for five tax invoices.

D. The plaintiff, after being notified of the above decision on June 12, 2006, filed an objection on the 28th of the same month, and the defendant decided to make a correction after conducting on-site inspection on September 1, 2006. As a result, as to the plaintiff on December 14, 2006, the tax invoice received from the plaintiff on December 14, 2006 (the supply price of KRW 20,000,000) shall be deemed to have been actually traded as a construction contract document, construction renunciation note, deposit note, etc. The tax invoice of this case received from the plaintiff on March 31, 2006 (the supply price of KRW 530,000,000,000, excluding the supply price of KRW 120,000,000,000,000, which was issued on March 31, 200, and thus, the tax invoice was not issued in advance.

E. The plaintiff filed an appeal on March 12, 2007 after the above objection and the National Tax Tribunal decided to deduct the input tax amount of 120,00,000 won (the supply price of 109,090,900 won, and the input tax amount of 10,909,09,090 won) by March 31, 2006, which is the issuer of the tax invoice of this case, from March 31, 2006, as a legitimate tax invoice, since the input tax amount to be deducted is KRW 10,909,00,000 (the purchase tax amount of 10,909,000 won at the time of deduction of the input tax amount of 10,90,000 won, which is the ground for the above determination to additionally reduce the input tax amount of 100,000 won to 100,000 won or more, 106,000 won, or more.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The parties' assertion

(1) The defendant's assertion

Unlike the latter part of Article 9 (3) of the former Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 8142 of Dec. 30, 2006; hereinafter referred to as the "Value-Added Tax Act") and Article 60 (2) 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, with respect to the construction price paid after May 3, 2006 (the date of actual completion of the building in this case) and March 31, 2006, which is different from that of the time of supply for actual services, the tax invoice in this case was prepared before March 31, 2006, and thus, it is not subject to the deduction of the input tax amount as it constitutes a tax invoice that is entered differently from the necessary entry of the tax invoice in Article 17 (2) 1-2 of the Value-Added Tax Act, and thus, the disposition in this case is legitimate.

Although the tax invoice of this case is prepared prior to the actual date of supply and the actual date of supply does not coincide, as long as the actual transaction is confirmed within the same taxable period, the tax invoice of this case constitutes a legitimate tax invoice, as it falls under a case where transaction is confirmed in view of the fact that the relevant tax invoice and other items mentioned therein under Article 60 (2) 2 of

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) On January 6, 2006, the Plaintiff concluded a contract for the instant construction work with 00000, but on March 2, 2006, the Plaintiff paid 20,000,000 construction cost to 000, and received a tax invoice (value of KRW 20,000,000) from the above 000, and the Plaintiff waived the instant construction work on the same day.

(2) As between March 2, 2000 and March 2, 2006, the date of commencement for the instant construction project was 880,000,000 won (including value-added tax) and the construction cost corresponding to the completed portion of the construction on May 10, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into the instant contract to be paid once a month. On April 30, 2006, the Plaintiff agreed to KRW 70,000,000 as the internal office and the interior office of the instant building were cancelled, and the entire construction period for the instant building was from January 12, 2006 to May 30, 206, and the date of actual approval for use is May 3, 2006.

(3) The Plaintiff paid to 0000 the full amount of the agreed construction cost not later than June 30, 2006, including the payment of construction cost, KRW 10,000,000 on March 14, 2006, KRW 20,000 on the same month, KRW 40,000 on the 22th of the same month, KRW 50,000 on the 30th of the same month, KRW 10,000 on the 30th of the same month, KRW 30,000 on April 5 of the same year, and KRW 300,000 on the 17th of the same month, and KRW 50,000,000 on the 17th of the same month.

Facts that there is no dispute (applicable to recognition), Gap evidence 4, 5, Eul evidence 1-4, 5-5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

(1) Since a tax assessment of value-added tax is conducted on a taxable unit divided for a certain period, as long as the tax invoice was formulated differently from the time of supply for goods or services within the same taxable period as the time of supply for the goods or services, the mutual verification function as a tax invoice and the legal principles of the value-added tax system shall be ensured, without impairing the said tax invoice. Such circumstance does not change depending on whether the tax invoice was prepared before the time of supply for the goods or services or whether the tax invoice was prepared after the time of supply for the goods or services. Thus, as in the case of a tax invoice prepared after the time of supply for the goods or services, it is treated as a legitimate tax invoice under Article 60(2)3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, as in the case of a tax invoice prepared before the time of supply for the goods or services, it is reasonable to treat the tax invoice as a legitimate tax invoice in the case where some necessary entries of the tax invoice were written erroneously but it is confirmed by considering the pertinent tax invoice as other necessary entries or discretionary entries, which is merely a provision of supply period.

(2) It is reasonable to treat the instant tax invoice as a legitimate tax invoice, and the Defendant’s disposition based on a different premise is unlawful, as well as the actual supply of services, such as the entry of the instant tax invoice, was conducted between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff,0000, and as recognized earlier, that the instant tax invoice was prepared within the same taxable period as the time of supply for the service.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Related Acts and subordinate statutes

/ Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 8142 of Dec. 30, 2006)

Article 3 (Taxable Period)

(1) The taxable period of value-added taxes for entrepreneurs shall be as follows:

First period: from January 1 to June 30; and

2. Second period: from July 1 to December 31.

Article 9 (Transaction Time)

(1) The time of supply for goods shall be the time provided for in the following subparagraphs:

1. When the goods are delivered, in case where the moving of goods is required;

2. When the goods are made available, in case where the moving of goods is not required; and

3. When the supply of goods is decided, in case where the provisions of subparagraphs 1 and 2 are not applicable.

(2) The time when services are supplied shall be the time when services are supplied or goods, facilities or rights are used.

(3) Where an entrepreneur receives all or part of the price for goods or services before the time provided in paragraph (1) or (2) arrives, and at the same time issues a tax invoice provided in Article 16 or a receipt provided in Article 32 with respect to such price, the time of such issuance shall be deemed the time of supply for the goods or services concerned, respectively.

Article 16 (Tax Invoice)

(1) Where an entrepreneur registered as a taxpayer supplies goods or services, a written invoice specifying the following matters (hereinafter referred to as the “written invoice”) shall be delivered to the recipient under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree: Provided, That where the Presidential Decree prescribes, the time of delivery may vary:

1. Registration number, name or denomination of the businessman who provides;

2. Registration number of the person who receives;

3. Supply value and value-added tax;

4. Preparation date; and

5. Matters as prescribed by the Presidential Decree other than those under subparagraphs 1 through 4.

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

(1) The amount of value-added tax payable by an entrepreneur (hereinafter referred to as the “amount of tax payable”) shall be the amount calculated by deducting the amount of tax under each of the following subparagraphs (hereinafter referred to as the “amount of tax for purchase”) from the amount of tax for the goods and services supplied by the entrepreneur: Provided, That in cases of an input tax amount exceeding the amount of tax for purchase, the amount of tax payable shall be the amount of tax for refund

1. The tax amount for the supply of goods or services used or to be used for his own business;

(2) The following input taxes shall not be deducted from the output tax amount:

1-2. An input tax amount in a case where the tax invoice under Article 16 (1) and (3) is not delivered, or where the whole or part of the matters to be entered under Article 16 (1) 1 through 4 (hereinafter referred to as the “matters to be entered”) is not entered or entered differently from the fact on the delivered tax invoice: Provided, That the input tax amount in such a case as prescribed by the Presidential Decree shall be excluded;

【The Enforcement Decree

Article 22 (Time of Supply for Services)

The time of supply for services under Article 9 (2) of the Act shall be as follows: Provided, That if the time of supply for services supplied before closure of business arrives after such cessation of business, the time of supply for such services shall be deemed the time

1. In the case of ordinary supply, when the offer of the service is completed;

2. Where services are supplied on completion basis, interim payment, long-term installment or on other terms, or services are continuously supplied via which the unit of supply is not possible, when each part of the price is received;

3. Where the provision of services is completed and the value of supply is determined, in case where the provisions of subparagraphs 1 and 2 are not applicable.

Article 60 (Scope of Purchase Tax Amount)

(2) The cases prescribed by Presidential Decree under the proviso to Article 17 (2) 1-2 of the Act means any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Where the businessman who has made an application for the business registration under Article 7 (1), has received as to the transaction until the delivery date of the business registration certificate under Article 7 (3), the resident registration number of the businessman or his representative entered;

2. Where some of the necessary entries of the tax invoice delivered under Article 16 (1) of the Act are erroneously entered, but the fact of transactions is confirmed in view of the relevant tax invoice and other necessary entries or discretionary entries;

3. A tax invoice delivered after the time of supply for goods or services is supplied, which is within the taxable period to which the time of supply belongs.