면허취소처분취소 청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff was established on June 25, 2007 and operated a liquor sales business, etc.
On March 31, 2009, when the Plaintiff sold alcoholic beverages to a non-licensed dealer on March 31, 2009, the Plaintiff obtained a liquor brokerage license with designation conditions attached to the revocation of the license.
B. From April 21, 2016 to August 31, 2016, the Central Regional Tax Office conducted an investigation of tracking the process of alcoholic beverage distribution with the Plaintiff, and then notified the Defendant of the taxation data that the Plaintiff prepared and delivered a tax invoice different from the fact during the value-added tax period from January 21, 2013 to February 2015, and sold alcoholic beverages to the intermediary wholesaler without a license for alcoholic beverage sales.
C. On November 11, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to revoke the Plaintiff’s license for liquor brokerage business (hereinafter “instant disposition”) pursuant to Article 15(2)4 of the former Liquor Tax Act (amended by Act No. 1528, Dec. 19, 2017) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s violation of the duty to issue a tax invoice during the period of 1, 2015 and the period of 2, 2015 constitutes at least 10/1,000 of the total sales amount of liquor (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
Although the Defendant additionally asserted the grounds for the disposition that the Plaintiff sold alcoholic beverages to an unlicensed intermediary wholesaler in violation of the conditions of designation of alcoholic beverage brokerage business license, as seen later, it does not separately determine the grounds for disposition as the original grounds for disposition are recognized.
On January 9, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an appeal seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with the Tax Tribunal, but was dismissed on April 18, 2017.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1-1, 2, Eul evidence 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the disposition is lawful;
A. The plaintiff's assertion recognizes only the details of transactions stored in SALE3 Pool among the plaintiff's computer program databases as real transactions, and is stored only in SALE2 Pool.