부가가치세등부과처분취소
1. The Defendant’s value-added tax of KRW 5,882,290 on June 13, 2012 and value-added tax of KRW 2,07 on the Plaintiff on June 13, 2012, which was assessed against the Plaintiff.
1. The plaintiff is a wholesale corporation that imports or imports and supplies scrap metal in Korea.
On June 13, 2012, the Defendant rendered a disposition to the Plaintiff as follows:
(hereinafter “each disposition of this case”). A
Around October 2008, the Plaintiff submitted only a tax invoice for KRW 211,600,000,000 in supply value of KRW 1,820,000 in supply value B, even though the Plaintiff sold scrap metal imported from the Hong Kong corporations, around October 2008, and did not issue a tax invoice for KRW 1,609,000 in sales return, and imposed KRW 571,614,440 in corporate tax for the business year 2008, by deeming that the Plaintiff omitted sales return without issuing a tax invoice for KRW 1,609,00 in sales return.
(2) Although the Plaintiff sold an amount equivalent to KRW 1,062,00,000, purchased from the Seowon Han River Co., Ltd. from June 2007 to April 2008, the Plaintiff issued and issued a tax invoice in the name of Tae Taejin Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), it was deemed that the Plaintiff issued and issued the tax invoice in the name of Tae Taejin Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “T”) for the first year value-added tax of KRW 5,82,290, value-added tax of KRW 1,882,290, value-added tax of KRW 9,786,240, value-added tax of KRW 2,240, and value-added tax of KRW 1,344,550 for the first year of 208.
(hereinafter “instant Disposition 2”). The Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on September 4, 2012, but was dismissed on December 23, 2013.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, 5, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination on the legitimacy of the instant disposition
A. As to the Disposition No. 1 of this case, the Disposition No. 1 of this case was conducted on the premise that around October 2008 the imported scrap metal was supplied in KRW 1,820,00,000.
However, in addition to the purport of the entire argument in the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 6 through 17, 22, and 23, the following facts may be recognized, and all evidence submitted by the defendant are also stated in the tax invoice issued by the plaintiff to Eul.