부가가치세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. B, on July 7, 200, registered as a business name A and registered as the supplier of the same international steel company (hereinafter “Dong international steel company”), and upon designation as the supplier of the same international steel company (hereinafter “Dong international steel company”), the Plaintiff established the Plaintiff on April 30, 2008, and thereafter, the Plaintiff started business in the same place of business from May 1, 2008, and runs the business of collecting and selling waste resources.
Serial 1, 2011, the purchase price for the total purchase price for 13 D (G) 13 741,081,200 13 741,081,200 2 E (H) 10 2,820,358,200 84,110,129,750 18,930 6,930,478,950 3 F (I) 92,76,515,90 92,76,515,90 23,5615,90 23,561,461,439,400 6,676,645,640,650 408,650,407,676,507,50
B. During the first and second taxable periods of January 201, 201, the Plaintiff received each of the following tax invoices (hereinafter “instant tax invoices”) from D, E, and F (hereinafter “instant purchaser”), and the Defendant deducted the value of supply on the key tax invoices when filing a value-added tax return in the same taxable period from the input tax amount.
C. On March 18, 2013 through June 15, 2013, the Defendant conducted a tax investigation on the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant tax investigation”), and determined that the actual business operator of the key purchaser was J. On August 1, 2013, the Defendant deducted the pertinent input tax amount on the grounds that the key tax invoice is false, and issued a revised notice of KRW 1,076,607,07,070 for the second half year of 201 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
On August 28, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for adjudication on August 28, 2013, and the Tax Tribunal decided to dismiss the request on December 26, 2013.
【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap’s 1 through 5 evidence, Eul’s 1, 2, and 11 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s instant disposition is unlawful for the following reasons.
1. The plaintiff is the main purchaser.