특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(조세)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
However, for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (1) The F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) discounts a certain amount of the supply price at the time of supplying medicines to the customer according to an agreement, which is merely the fact that a sales contract is made according to the supply price and some of the sales claims are waived, and thus, the facts charged of the revised tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act are used as the term “sales tax invoice” but the terms of the Value-Added Tax
In the part other than the facts charged below, the term " corrected tax invoice" shall be used.
shall not constitute a reason for the issuance of such documents.
② In order for sales incentive to be recognized as sales incidental expenses pursuant to the Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act to be included in the total amount of deductible expenses, it shall meet the requirement that it should be paid in accordance with certain conditions to all business partners who are not a specific business entity. Since the sales incentive fund of this case did not meet the requirements for inclusion in deductible expenses because it did not meet a certain ratio of sales bond, it did not meet the requirements for inclusion in deductible expenses but did not meet the requirements for inclusion in deductible expenses.
(3) Where the Defendant issued a revised tax invoice to the Sales Claim Distribution Fund that should be treated as entertainment expenses and received a deduction of value-added tax by adding up the amount of the revised tax invoice issued at the time of submission of the revised tax invoice to the buyer and buyer, and issued a revised tax invoice to evade corporate tax as sales incidental expenses and filed a report on value-added tax and corporate tax on the basis of the revised tax invoice
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged is the F representative director manufacturing the medicine, and F around October 2009, Co., Ltd., G (hereinafter “G”).
The name of another stock company below is also the same.