(심리불속행) 가짜세금계산서 판매상과의 거래로 사실과 다른 세금계산서 수취에 해당함[국승]
Seoul High Court-2015-Nu64376 ( October 27, 2016)
Review-Supplementary - 2014-01 ( October 29, 2014)
(C) the receipt of a false tax invoice in a transaction with a fake tax invoice sale.
(C) If a transactional investigation is conducted with respect to the transaction order, the purchase price Aa is an enterprise confirmed and accused for the sale of fake tax invoices, and the formerCC receives a tax invoice issued without actual transaction, and it is appropriate to dispose of the input tax deduction.
Article 16 of the former Value-Added Tax Act
Supreme Court-2016-Du-60416 Disposition revoking Value-Added Tax Imposition
PriorCC
D Head of the tax office
October 27, 2016
February 23, 2017
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.
All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the grounds of appeal are examined.
subsection (1) of Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal does not include the reasons
There is no ground for appeal (the ground of appeal generally disputing the fact-finding belonging to the exclusive authority of the court below)
(a) Aaaa and Band B shall, upon examination of the record, be subject to the objective of the transaction.
There is no evidence. On the other hand, e-mail or related advertisements sent by ParkF to the Plaintiff by the Plaintiff by ParkF.
Account and transactions in which the Plaintiff has remitted the proceeds of the transaction, even though it is marked under aaaa;
The specification table is 'bb(F)' and it is difficult to recognize the plaintiff's good faith and negligence.
b. The other party to the transaction is not aaaa, and the other party to the transaction is not a
inconsistent with the contents of the regular summary order and the rejection of the facts accepted in such summary order
There is no objective evidence. The ground of appeal cannot be accepted.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 5 of the above Act by the assent of all participating Justices.
It is so decided as per Disposition.