가공의 세금계산서인지 여부[국패]
Whether a processed tax invoice is a processed tax invoice
It is illegal to impose a tax on the nominal lender as it only lends the name of the business operator and has not been involved in the business.
Article 14 (Real Taxation under the former Framework Act on National Taxes)
1. The defendant's imposition of value-added tax against the plaintiff on October 7, 2006 shall be revoked all of the imposition of KRW 14,769,110 for the first term of 202, and KRW 9,425,410 for the second term of 2002, and KRW 25,608,890 for the first term of 203.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
The same shall apply to the order.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On March 7, 200, on the ○ Metal, the Plaintiff was registered as the representative, the place of business of the ○○○-7, the ○○-dong ○○-dong ○○-7, and the type of business of the Plaintiff was reported to be closed on March 1, 2000 on the date of non-ferrous metal wholesale business and opening business (hereinafter referred to as the “instant business registration”). On June 30, 2003, the Plaintiff was reported to be closed from the business department.
B. According to the tax invoice of KRW 165,30,00 in total, KRW 75,180,00 in total, KRW 50,336,00 in total, and KRW 165,30 in total, and KRW 165,304,00 in 202 in total, the amount of KRW 165,30 in total, and KRW 160 in 203 in total, the value-added tax return was filed.
C. On October 11, 2006, the Defendant issued the instant disposition imposing value-added tax amounting to KRW 9,425,410, and KRW 25,608,890 for the first period of January 2002, 2002 on the Plaintiff, by deeming that the instant tax invoice was processed tax invoices, and by not deducting the input tax amount based on the said tax invoice.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence No. 3-1 to 6, Eul evidence No. 4-7, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The plaintiff's assertion
The actual business operator of 00 metals is Kim Il-tae, and the plaintiff only lent the business operator's name to Kim Il-tae, and there is no relation to the operation of 00 metals, and it cannot be readily concluded that the tax invoice of this case was a processed tax invoice received without real transaction. Thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful.
(b) Related statutes;
Article 14 (Real Taxation under the former Framework Act on National Taxes)
C. Determination
Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments as to Gap evidence 6-1 through 39, Gap evidence 8, 9, Eul evidence Nos. 11-2, Eul evidence Nos. 11-2, and Eul evidence Nos. 11-2, and the testimony of Kim Jong-tae, the plaintiff was convicted of imprisonment with labor for not less than 10 months on May 14, 2003 due to a violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Act from this court on the grounds that the plaintiff was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 2 years. Kim Tae-tae was convicted of 10 years of suspended sentence. Kim Jong-tae was the location of "○○-dong ○○○, 00-dong, 000-dong, and Eul evidence Nos. 11, 11-2, and the whole purport of the pleadings. The plaintiff could only be viewed as having engaged in the plaintiff's business in the course of making a sale under the name of "○○-gu, 200-dong, which had not been involved in the plaintiff's business registration.
3. Conclusion
Thus, the disposition of this case is unlawful without the need to further examine whether the tax invoice of this case is the processed tax invoice, and the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all.