A. The Defendant is a company that runs the waste collection and transportation business, etc., and the Plaintiff owns dump trucks and is engaged in the transportation business.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a transport contract with the Defendant and transported aggregate, etc. entrusted by the Defendant.

C. From November 1, 2018 to December 31 of the same year, the Plaintiff transported aggregate entrusted by the Defendant, and the transport cost agreed to be paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff is KRW 30,649,806 (including value-added tax).

[Ground of recognition] In light of the above facts, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4, and 5 (including additional number), and the overall purport of the pleadings, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 30,649,806 won and the amount calculated by the rate of 12% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which the plaintiff seeks against the plaintiff as of August 16, 2019.

Judgment on Defendant’s argument

A. The defendant asserts that since the plaintiff revoked the issuance of the tax invoice, the defendant is only obligated to pay the remaining amount after deducting the amount of KRW 1,579,698, which is equivalent to the value-added tax payable by the defendant.

B. In a case where there is an agreement between the parties to the transaction to bear the value-added tax, an entrepreneur may directly request a person who receives the supply pursuant to the agreement to pay the amount equivalent to the value-added tax. In light of the fact that the tax invoice is obligated to prepare and deliver the tax invoice regardless of the receipt of the price under the Value-Added Tax Act, barring any special circumstance, such as the existence of a separate agreement between the parties to the transaction, the obligation to issue the tax invoice and the obligation to pay

C. Therefore, the Plaintiff did not issue a tax invoice to the Defendant.

(2) such issuance has been revoked.