2. The plaintiff shall bear the litigation costs.

A. From December 28, 2007 to ○○○-dong 92-20, the Plaintiff is a business entity running a gas station in △△△-dong (hereinafter “instant gas station”).

나. 원고는 2008년도 제1기 과세기간 중 주식회사 ◇◇에너지 ▷▷지점(이하 '이 사건 거래처'라 한다)으로부터 공급가액 합계 71,827,273원인 매입세금계산서 3매(이하 '이 사건 세금계산서'라 한다)를 교부받아 관련 매입세액 7,182,727원을 공제하여 부가가치세 신고를 하였다.

C. From April 24, 2008 to June 30, 2008, the director of Busan Regional Tax Office conducted an investigation of tracking the distribution process with respect to △△ Energy Co., Ltd., the principal office of the business partner of the instant case (hereinafter referred to as "△△ Energy"), and the branch office of △△△ Energy, including the business partner of the instant case, and confirmed that the instant tax invoice was processed data, and notified the Defendant thereof.

D. Accordingly, on August 1, 2009, the Defendant denied the deduction of the input tax amount of the tax invoice of this case that the Plaintiff deducted according to the above notice, and on August 1, 2009, corrected and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 10,916,90 for the first term portion of the tax invoice of this case (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. On August 25, 2009, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on November 6, 2009, but the said appeal was dismissed on December 31, 2009.

[Reasons for Recognition]

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) The Plaintiff: (a) purchased 60.00 liter via three times from the instant transaction partner; (b) received each purchase tax invoice, a detailed statement of transaction, and a shipment slip; and (c) deposited the sales amount in the passbook opened in the name of the instant transaction partner; and (b) did not regard the instant tax invoice as a false tax invoice.

(2) The Plaintiff received the order of Gangwon-A, who is a business partner member of the instant transaction partner, and confirmed that the Plaintiff, as well as the copy of the business registration certificate of the instant transaction partner and the copy of the certificate of registration of △△ Energy sales business, by directly making phone calls with the phone number on which the said order was issued, was engaged in the petroleum sales business. Since the transaction partner of the instant case is not a person who actually supplies goods or services as so-called so-called “data,” even though the tax invoice of the instant case constitutes a tax invoice for disguised transactions or processing transactions, the Plaintiff was unaware of the false fact that the transaction partner of the instant case was not aware, and was

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) After completing the registration of petroleum retail business on June 19, 2007, ○○ Energy was registered as the oil wholesale business and completed the business registration on July 1, 2007, and then closed on April 24, 2008. During the above business period, any oil reservoir across the country did not have received oil in the name of ○○ Energy. While concluding a lease agreement on the oil reservoir and the transportation vehicles, etc., which are the storage facilities of Busan Tank Terminal Terminal Terminal, for the registration of petroleum retail business, there was no number of parcels using the oil reservoir and the transportation vehicles, etc.

(2) The headB, who is the actual business operator of △△ Energy, used the so-called “SCC” position in which he received or delivered false tax invoices without real transactions, and used the title of “SCC.” From July 2007, 207, he/she issued sales tax invoices in the name of △△ Energy to the gas stations without real transactions and traded in which he/she received certain fees to the gas stations. Since it is not easy to secure the gas stations, he/she contacted without material non-taxable oil distributors, etc. to deliver the oil without material to the gas stations.

(3) On the other hand, when the oil is delivered through the normal distribution route to the gas station, one of the orderer out of Chapter 4 of the shipment table (the date and time of shipment, the name of the customer, the place of arrival, the place of arrival, transportation equipment, items and the volume of the shipment, weight, etc.) issued at the time of shipment at the oil reservoir, etc. at the oil reservoir, etc. at the oil reservoir, and one of the two of the two copies is delivered to the oil station in question by the driver of the vehicle transporting the oil in question, and one of the two copies is delivered to the oil station in question by the driver of the vehicle in question, and the other one is delivered to the oil station in question. △△△△△ has not issued the shipment slip to the delivery driver on the day of shipment, and after the oil was delivered, △△△△ has made the shipment slip and the driver of the gas station in question, not the actual contents of the shipment using the computer and the twitter, and has prepared a false list in question.

(4) The director of Busan Regional Tax Office: (a) filed a complaint with the investigating authority by deeming △△ Energy as having issued a false tax invoice without actually supplying oil; and (b) on March 25, 2010, from Seoul High Court (2009No2687), the above headB issued a false sales tax invoice of KRW 33,94,03,106, including the instant tax invoice, to each of the gas stations including the Plaintiff, and received a false purchase tax invoice of KRW 33,813,257,915, for the reason that he was issued a false purchase tax invoice of KRW 33,813,257,915. The above judgment was dismissed from the Supreme Court (2010Do4068) and became final and conclusive on July 22, 2010.

【Reasons for Recognition】 Each entry of No. 6-1 to 6-6, the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

(1) Whether the instant tax invoice is different from the fact

(A) The meaning that the entries of the tax invoice under the Value-Added Tax Act are different from the facts is that the necessary entries of the tax invoice refer to the cases where the contents of the tax invoice are inconsistent with those of the person who actually supplied or is supplied with the goods or services, regardless of the formal entries of the transaction contract, etc. made between the parties to the goods or services.

(B) Even if the Plaintiff actually purchased oil in the quantity stated in the instant tax invoice and sold it to the customer, it is acknowledged that the customer who supplied oil to the Plaintiff is a supplier listed in the instant tax invoice. In other words, the following circumstances are acknowledged as follows: ① △△ Energy was established for the purpose of trading false tax invoices from the beginning without real transactions, and only the tax invoice was issued or received by the tax authorities without real transactions, and the judgment became final and conclusive on the ground that the actual operator B had received false purchase, sales, and issued or received the tax invoice; ② △△△ Energy did not have received oil from any of the nationwide oil stations and did not have used all the oil storage facilities or transportation vehicles reported after receiving the registration of the petroleum sales business operator; ③ △△△ Energy received the processed tax invoice and had the petroleum distributor purchase without material without material, and there was no actual purchase of oil, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff’s purchase of the instant tax invoice from any other transaction party, such as the Plaintiff’s oil supplier, etc. in the instant case.

(2) Whether the Plaintiff is bona fide and without fault or not

(A) The actual supplier and the supplier on a tax invoice may not deduct or refund the input tax amount unless there is any special circumstance that the person who received another tax invoice is unaware of the fact that the supplier was unaware of the fact of misrepresentation of the name of the supplier, and that the supplier was not negligent in not knowing the fact of misrepresentation of the name as above (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du2277, Jun. 28, 2002). Furthermore, the fact that the supplier was not aware of the fact of misrepresentation of the supplier’s business registration certificate, the permit for the sale of the goods or services, and the detailed route and process of the issuance and delivery of the tax invoice, etc. are considered as follows: (a) the actual supplier is aware of the supplier; and (b) the fact that there is a sufficient circumstance that the beneficiary was aware of the fact of misrepresentation of the supplier’s trade name, the fact that the supplier’s business registration certificate, the sales permit, the sales specifications of the goods or services, etc. is insufficient to view that the actual supplier’s name.

(B) On the premise of such a legal doctrine, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in each statement in the Health Center, Gap's 2 through 4, and evidence Nos. 7, the plaintiff was offered to supply oil to the price of 20 to 30 won, which is less than the other transaction partner, if the plaintiff made a cash transaction from the Gangwon-do business member of the other transaction partner of the case, and the above Gangwon-A was ordered by the above transaction partner of the case, and the copy of the registration certificate of the transaction partner of the case, ○○ Energy sales business, and copy of the passbook of the passbook of the

그러나 앞서 본 사실관계 및 갑 제5호증의 1 내지 3의 각 기재에 의하면, 원고가 받은 출하전표에 유류의 출하지가 이 사건 거래처의 사업장 소재지인 ▷▷에 있는 ▷▷저유소가 아니라 ◁◁저유소로 기재되어 있었음에도 이에 관한 확인을 하지 않고 거래를 계속한 점, 이 사건 거래처와 ◇◇에너지는 2007년 7월에 개업한 업체로서 이러 한 신생업체와 거래하면서 앞서 본 바와 같은 비정상적인 출하전표를 교부받았을 뿐만 아니라 해당 출하전표에 근거하여 저유소에서 이 사건 거래처로 유류가 실제 출하된 사실이 있었는지 여부를 확인하지 않았던 점, 원고는 이 사건 거래처의 사업장 소재지나 유류시설을 직접 방문하여 확인한 적이 없는 점 등의 사정이 인정되는바, 이러한 사정에 비추어보면, 원고가 이 사건 세금계산서를 교부받을 당시 자료상인 이 사건 거래처와 ◇◇에너지의 명의위장 사실을 알지 못하였고 알지 못하였음에 과실이 없었다고 볼 수 없다.

3.In conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.