2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiff's status

The Plaintiff (○○○○○. ○○○. ○○○. ○○. ○○. ○○. ○○. ○○. ○○○. ○○. ○○○. ○○ ○ was changed from “BB Compensation Co., Ltd. to the current trade name, and hereinafter “Plaintiff, regardless of whether before or after the mutual change”).

B. Plaintiff’s value-added tax return

The Plaintiff received a purchase tax invoice of ○○○○○○○○○, a taxable period of the value-added tax for the ○○○○○○, ○○○○○, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as “CC”) on the supply price by providing “high-form fuel cell boilers” from “CC,” and received the purchase tax invoice of ○○○○,” and made a preliminary tax return of value-added tax by deducting the input tax amount according to the instant tax invoice from the DD on ○○, around 00, around 00.

C. Defendant’s corrective disposition of value-added tax

The Defendant, ○○○○. ○. The instant case, which the Plaintiff received fromCC, against the Plaintiff.

The tax invoice is the tax invoice for processing that the Plaintiff received without actual transaction withCC.

For reasons, the input tax amount on the value of supply entered shall not be deducted, and the former Value-Added Tax Act ( January 1, 2013) shall not be deducted.

Articles 21 and 22 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (Amended by Act No. 11608, Jan. 1, 2013)

Pursuant to Articles 47-3 and 47-4, 2010 pursuant to the amended by Act No. 11604 (hereinafter the same shall apply)

A total value-added tax on ○○○○○○○ (main tax ○○○○○) £« Additional Tax on Tax Invoice

○○○○○○ KRW ○○○○○○○○○○○○ on an additional tax for unfaithful return + Additional tax for underreporting ○○○○○)

The correction and notification (hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case") was made.

(d) Procedures of the previous trial; and

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on ○○○○○○. ○○○○. ○○○. However, the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on ○○○○○. ○○○○.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and relevant Acts and subordinate statutes;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant disposition is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) It is not a false tax invoice.

The Plaintiff is actually supplied with high-form fuel cell cands fromCC.

Since a commodity supply contract was concluded and the tax invoice of this case was received, the above tax invoice cannot be deemed to be a false tax invoice.

2) The imposition of an illegal under-reported penalty tax is illegal

The Plaintiff did not know that the instant tax invoice was a false tax invoice.

for the purpose of tax evasion, the relevant input tax amount shall not be deducted and the return of value-added tax shall not be made.

on the part of the plaintiff that the penalty tax for illegal underreporting shall not be imposed on the plaintiff

law.

3) It is against the principle of proportionality.

The Plaintiff entered into a goods transaction agreement with CC’s representative director E and the instant tax

The defendant is entitled to receive an invoice and receive an ordinary input tax amount, and the defendant is entitled to receive the invoice.

The Ftax invoice of this case without delivery by the Plaintiff, dependent on the content of the investigation in Ftax Office.

The instant disposition is against the principle of proportionality, comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) the intention of tax evasion and the deduction of the input tax amount; and

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

3. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Whether the tax invoice of this case is false

1) Relevant legal principles

As long as the criminal judgment is affirmed in the administrative litigation, the fact judgment of the above criminal judgment is judged.

Unless there are special circumstances to deem that it is difficult to employ it, the fact that it is contrary shall not be recognized.

(Supreme Court Decision 98Du10424 delivered on November 26, 1999).

(ii) the facts of recognition

Facts without dispute and the purport of the whole pleadings in each entry of Gap's No. 00, Eul's No. 00

In full view of the foregoing, the following facts can be recognized.

A) EE by the representative director ofCC andCC ○○ District Court ○○○.

The judgment of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was prosecuted on and around ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, issued a tax invoice stating the value of supply as if the EE had not been supplied with a high-form fuel cell to the Plaintiff on and around ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, on the grounds of criminal facts, such as “CC issued a tax invoice stating the value of supply as ○○○○○,” andCC issued a false tax invoice as above with respect to its business.” On the grounds of criminal facts, “E, who is the representative ofCC, issued a false tax invoice as above,” the judgment of ○0,000 won, which became final and conclusive after the Prosecutor appealed

B) The representative director of the Plaintiff, the head of GG, and the Plaintiff ○○○○○○. ○○○○ ○○ District Court ○○○○.

The judgment of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ and 200○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was prosecuted, and the headG had not been supplied with goods or services on the ○○○○○○○○○○○, around 200, when filing a value-added tax return, submitted to the public official in charge the list of tax invoices by seller stating false details of transactions, such as stating the goods equivalent to the ○○○○○○○○○○○ upon receipt of the goods or services from the CC.” The Plaintiff submitted the list of tax invoices on the Plaintiff’s business, which was the representative director, to the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, respectively, on the grounds of criminal facts. The judgment of the first instance court became final and conclusive on the grounds that the Plaintiff did not file an appeal, and the head of ○○○○○○, which was declared a suspended sentence of unfair sentencing.

3) Determination

In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the Health Team, EE,CC, and other relevant facts

The judgment of conviction was final and conclusive in this case, on the ground that the plaintiff was convicted of the crime that "the plaintiff received the tax invoice of this case entered falsely as if it were supplied with goods or services even if it was not supplied with goods or services byCC."

Since there seems to be no particular circumstance to reject the determination of the facts of the resolution, there is a different premise.

The plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit.

B. Whether the imposition of an illegal underreporting penalty tax is illegal

1) Relevant legal principles

Article 47-3 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes, Article 12-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and Tax Evaders

In full view of the language and text of each subparagraph of Article 3(6) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and the legal nature of underreporting penalty taxes

In view of the fact that Article 47-3 (2) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes imposes an additional tax in the case of an illegal underreporting

all or any part of the facts serving as the basis for calculating the tax base or amount of national tax

In the case of either tax or fictitious tax payment because it is impossible or significantly difficult to impose and collect the tax.

'Cheating' in order to induce the obligor to report the tax base in good faith;

penalty tax is imposed on a person who is much higher than that in the case of an under-reported general return.

Article 12-2 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes is understood to be intended to evade "unlawful".

Punishment of Tax Offenses Act, which is a provision for punishment of crimes, falls under any of the subparagraphs of Article 3(6)

In light of the provisions of Article 47-3(2) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes, the provisions of Article 47-3(2)

In case of underreporting the tax amount due to a 'unlawful act' which is a requirement for an illegal underreporting penalty, "national tax" means national tax;

Abnormal action such as making it difficult to discover the facts requiring taxation or forging false facts;

underreporting the tax base or tax amount to be paid by such act; and

tax evasion purpose, such as the avoidance of a progressive tax rate, the application of the provisions on losses brought forward, etc.

It should be viewed as meaning (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Du12362 decided Nov. 28, 2013).

(ii) the facts of recognition

In full view of the facts without dispute and the purport of the entire arguments as seen earlier:

The following facts may be recognized:

A) The representative director of the Plaintiff’s representative director is the representative of HH Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “HH”)

In addition to the issuance of the instant tax invoice, ○○○○○ ○. ○. ○. ○. ○. ○. ○, other than the instant tax invoice, hH is the purchasing entity, hereinafter “high-form solid fuel cell boilers.”

As being supplied, ○○○○○○. ○○○○○○, ○○○○, and ○○○○○. ○○○○○. Each of the supply values received ○○○○○○○, respectively.

(B)CC (CC) upon filing a preliminary return on value-added tax for the 2000○ 2000, the Plaintiff and HH

Based on each tax invoice issued, a total of ○○○○○○ upon filing a report;

○○○○ ○○. ○○○○○. issued a negative tax invoice revoking sales of each of the above tax invoices to the Plaintiff, and subsequently filed a final tax return for the year 200, for the 200, the Plaintiff filed a revised tax return to cancel the sales.

C) The Plaintiff paid ○○○○○○○○. ○○○○○, ○○○, and ○○○○○, ○○○○○, throughout ○○○○○○○, and ○○○○○, ○○○○, and ○○○○, ○○○. ○○○, ○○○, ○○, ○○, and ○○○, HH, andCC, in order of time, to arrange each financial transaction content of the Plaintiff, HH, andCC in the following table.

d)CC is jointly managed by E and the President J, the representative director of the Plaintiff and the JJ, the former representative director of the GG.

this title is the corporation and the person who has sent money in this title, and this title is the representative director of the plaintiff.

It is the fG's fG.

3) Determination

The facts and the evidence mentioned above, Gap's evidence No. 1, Eul's evidence No. 1, and Eul's evidence No. 1

Comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances acknowledged by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings:

- If the plaintiff deducted the input tax amount on the tax invoice of this case and reported the value-added tax.

In case of underreporting the tax amount to be paid (the tax amount after deducting the input tax amount from the sales tax amount) by unlawful means;

It is reasonable to view that the purpose of tax evasion was attributable to the Plaintiff’s assertion on this part. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion

80,000.

A) EE is from ○○○○○ ○. ○○○ ○. ○. ○. Ftax secretary 200% onCC by an investigator.

at the time of receiving a tax investigation related to the annual value-added tax, the bank’s loans can be easily extended.

with respect to the agreement between the plaintiff and the headG, the representative of HH, who unreal sales, unreal sales.

(1) A corporation shall pay money to the head of the Tong in a formal manner.

immediately withdrawals that have been withdrawn and that has been distributed to the greatest amount of the sale of the goods;

"......" The tax invoice of this case and the sales tax invoice related to the Mappy sales were prepared as of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○. The plaintiff and HH were sent to ○○○○○○○○○○. The plaintiff’s representative director stated that "......, the plaintiff’s representative director discussed this to GG."

B) The above statements of EE are very specific and natural, and EEA

It appears that there is no reason to make a false statement with respect to the plaintiff, as well as the above.

As seen above, the financial transaction details of the Plaintiff, HH, andCC around 00 ○○○○○. ○○○○○○ ○○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○. ○○ ○○ ○ ○○ ○ ○○ ○. As such, the statements of EE at the time of the said tax investigation are reliable.

C) Further to the above EE’s statements, the Plaintiff was issued the instant tax invoice.

From the date on which approximately 0 years elapsed since the date of the closure of the argument in this case, CCC to the date on which the argument in this case is closed.

The finance of the Plaintiff, HH, andCC that it is not supplied with all fuel cells, and the finance of the Plaintiff, HH, andCC

According to the specification of transactions, ○○○○○○○○ and ○○○○○○○ from this II, the Plaintiff’s representative director, head of the Gu, and headG, on the deposit account of HH, deposited each of the above after the deposit of the Plaintiff’s KRW ○○○○○ from ○○ and headG.

The process in which money is entered and withdrawn formally through the deposit account ofCC, the Plaintiff, and HH.

Then, under the above specification of transactions,CC has taken effect from the actual plaintiff

Comprehensively taking account of the fact that it is difficult to deem that the value of supply on the tax invoice was paid ○○○.

under the agreement with the E, the representative director of the CC, the plaintiff representative director of the CC.

It appears that the Plaintiff was issued a false tax invoice without any transaction. As above, the Plaintiff appears to have been issued the tax invoice

with knowledge that the tax invoice of this case is false, an input tax amount under the tax invoice of this case

A value-added tax return was filed by deducting ○○○○○○. ○○. ○○. CC issued a negative tax invoice to cancel sales fromCC, but no revised tax return was filed at the final return date of value-added tax.

D) The chief Justice, a co-oper of the Plaintiff’s representative director, the head of the GG, is serving as the auditor of theCC; and

CC is a company operated by the J and ECE.

E) The Plaintiff’s act of receiving the instant tax invoice fraudulently by the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes

Article 12-2(1) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act and Article 3(6) and (2) of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, whichever is applicable.

one is ‘False Evidence' or ‘Preparation and Receipt of False Documents'.

C. Whether it violates the principle of proportionality

The plaintiff was not supplied with goods or services byCC but the plaintiff was not supplied with such goods or services.

this case’s tax invoice, which was entered falsely as if it was supplied, was issued, and

The purpose of tax evasion is to deduct input tax on a tax invoice by filing a tax return on a tax invoice.

As seen earlier, the Plaintiff’s objection that differs from the foregoing premise is the same as recognized earlier.

Part of the assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion

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

shall be ruled.