Whether a tax invoice constitutes a false tax invoice (gold);

Since the instant transaction is merely a nominal transaction and cannot be deemed to have been transferred the actual ownership, the issue is that the tax invoice is prepared without a real transaction or is prepared differently from the actual transaction by at least the supplier, and constitutes a “tax invoice different from the actual transaction.”

Tax amount paid under Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 848,861,630 against the Plaintiff on October 10, 2003 shall be revoked.

1. Details of disposition;

A. The Plaintiff sold gold bullion equivalent to KRW 5,597,505,000 to ○○○ (hereinafter “○○○”) during the first taxable period of the value-added tax on 2002. The Plaintiff did not report and pay the relevant value-added tax on the ground that the sales of the said gold bullion are subject to zero-rate tax under the Value-Added Tax Act.

B. The Defendant imposed KRW 848,861,630 on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff’s sales of the said gold bullion supplied to ○○○○○○ was not subject to zero tax rate (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

(A) Evidence No. 1-5, and the purport of the entire pleadings set forth in No. 1 Red Card No. 1

2. The legality of disposition.

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff received a lawful purchase confirmation, etc. from ○○○ at the time of the transaction of the gold bullion. Since the aforementioned purchase confirmation, etc. is lawfully issued, the requirements for applying zero-rate tax are met only by itself, and whether there is any defect in the purchase confirmation, etc. or whether the supplied gold bullion has been actually exported do not have any connection with the requirements for applying zero-rate tax. Thus, the Plaintiff’s sales of the gold bullion in this case which is believed to be legitimate as legitimate are clearly subject to zero-rate tax rate, and the Defendant’s disposition of imposition

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Facts of recognition

(1) Circumstances of the instant gold bullion transaction, etc.

(A) On January 1, 2002, from 1 to 28, 202, the Plaintiff purchased 440km (21 375km from △△△△△△△△△△△△△, hereinafter the same shall apply) on 23 occasions from △△△△△△ corporation (hereinafter the “△△△△△△△△△△△”). According to the division certificate issued by the Plaintiff from △△△△△△△△△△△△△△, the purchase amount of the said gold bullion is 5,17, 482,104 won (11,630, 641 won for △△△△△△△△△△△△△△△, 50g, 406, 405g, 4657, 30657, 405g, 465g, 405g, 465g, 505g, 3657.

(B) The Plaintiff sold to ○○○○○ on January 2, 2002 a considerable amount of KRW 440km of KRW 5,597,505,00 [12,721,602 per kg. (i.e., KRW 5,597,505,000 ± 440 g).

(C) On January 2, 2002, 2-28, 2002, ○○○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “○○○○”) and ○○○○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “○○○○○”) sold gold bullion 375km 4,801,573,150 won [The amount of KRW 12,804,195 won per kg. (=4,801,573,150 won ± 4,801,573,150 won per kg.).

(D) The instant gold bullion transactions were conducted three times from △△△△ to ○○○ and ○○○○○○ on the same day.

(E) The domestic gold bullion price per km of 2002.1.2-28 is KRW 12,906,000 to KRW 13,840,00. The international gold bullion price per km during the above period is KRW 11,677,582 to KRW 12,689,282.

(2) Profits of the Plaintiff, etc. arising from the instant gold bullion transaction

(A) 9,38% of the purchase price (i.e., 090, 961 won - 12,721,602 won - 11,630,641 won) of the Plaintiff’s profit from the sales of the gold bullion of this case is 1,090,961 (i.e., 1,090,961 ± 11,630,641 won), and 48,048 won (i.e., 12,721,602 - 12,673,554 won) of the purchase price when the details of the return of value-added tax are based on the details of the return of value-added tax (i.e., 12,721,602 won - 12,673,554 won).

(B) 0.64% of the purchase price (=82.593 won ± 12,721,602 won) equivalent to 82,593 won (i.e., 12,804,195 won - 12,721,602 won) earned by ○○○ through the instant gold bullion transaction. (ii)

(C) The Plaintiff’s sales price of the gold bullion of this case is the price lower than that of national taxes, compared to that of national taxes at the time when the gold bullion of this case was sold at the time, which is higher than that of national taxes.

(3) Miscellaneous;

(A) On December 12, 2001, 2001, ○○○○ is a wholesale corporation for gold bullion business closed on April 25, 2002, which purchased gold bullion amounting to KRW 71.357 billion from 6 enterprises, such as ○○, etc. during the first taxable period of the value-added tax, at the zero-rate tax rate, and sold the whole amount of gold bullion to 9 domestic enterprises, including ○○ Korea Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “○○ Korea”), without paying the value-added tax (value 68.8 billion won, supply price), and its representative is currently missing.

(B) ○○ Company purchased gold bullion amounting to KRW 1.7 billion from two precious wholesale corporations, such as ○○○, etc., which opened on May 17, 2000 and closed down on July 2, 2002, as zero-rate tax, and sells the gold bullion to three enterprises, such as ○○ Korea, etc. (the supply price of KRW 1.83 billion). It is a corporation that discontinues its business without permission without reporting the value-added tax thereon, and its representative is currently missing.

(C) The Plaintiff was issued a divisional certificate from △△△△ in the purchasing office, but did not receive a divisional certificate from ○○ Investment.

(W) Evidence Nos. 1 to 16, Nos. 1 to 30, respectively, and the purport of the pleading

D. Determination

The issue of whether gold bullion supplied to a buyer by a supplier of gold bullion actually exported shall not affect the application of zero-rate tax rates to the supplier, and the fact that there is a defect in the procedure for issuing a written purchase approval does not necessarily mean that a written purchase approval issued by the head of a foreign exchange bank is null and void a year, and barring special circumstances, such as the supplier of goods knows that there is a defect in issuing a written purchase approval, the supply of goods made under the written purchase approval shall not be immediately excluded from the subject of zero-rate tax rate under the Value-Added Tax Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Du1375, Jan. 26, 2006

However, in full view of the following facts, the Plaintiff traded the instant gold bullion with the purchaser upon receiving a false purchase certificate, or knowing the fact that the instant gold bullion was not actually exported, and thus, the Plaintiff’s transaction of the gold bullion cannot be subject to zero tax rate.

(1) In light of the circumstances that the Plaintiff did not issue to ○○○○ a certificate of subdivision inevitably required for refund of customs duties pursuant to the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Refund of Customs Duties, etc. Levied on Raw Materials for Export, and the circumstances that the Plaintiff or ○○○○○ was aware of, or could have known, the fact that the instant gold bullion would not be exported after being exported, in light of the fact that the Plaintiff did not issue a certificate of subdivision, and the fact that the customs duties did not reach 3% of the price of the goods and that the benefits accrued from the instant gold bullion transaction

(2) The fact that the gold bullion, which the Plaintiff sold at zero-rate tax rate, was sold within a short time by ○○ and ○○○○○ within a short time, and that ○○ and ○○ Companies discontinued their business without filing a value-added tax return or payment.

(3) The fact that most of the gold bullion purchased by the Plaintiff was sold to ○○○ on the same day, including the transaction type of the gold bullion in this case, the method of payment, and the gold bullion transaction in this case not only seems to be a normal transaction, but also deemed to have performed the role of the Plaintiff as an authorized business entity to evade the value-added tax due

(4) The fact that △△△△△, a seller, and ○○○○, a purchaser, did not directly engage in a transaction and did not find any particular reason for trading through the Plaintiff or ○○○○○.

(5) In the case of gold bullion, it is difficult to think that: (a) gold bullion is exported again due to the difference between the international market price and the domestic market price; (b) gold bullion, which accounts for about 66% of the domestic market price; and (c) the price of the regularly imported gold bullion accounts for about 66% of the domestic market price; and (d) the price of the gold bullion, such as the avoidance of value-added tax, is crossing; and (e) it is difficult to think that it re-exports gold bullion

(6) Whether there is a considerable doubt as to whether the Plaintiff actually purchased the instant gold bullion from △△△△△△△△, different from the sales price indicated in the division certificate received by the Plaintiff and the sales price indicated in the details of the report of value-added tax reported to the Defendant

3. Conclusion

Thus, the defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate, and the plaintiff's assertion is without merit, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

public official law, order of law,

Value-Added Tax Act

Article 11 Application of zero Tax Rate

(1) zero tax rates shall apply to the supply of goods or services falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Exported goods;

2. Services supplied overseas;

3. International navigation services by ships or aircraft; and

4. Goods or services for earning foreign currency other than those as referred to in subparagraphs 1 through 3, which are prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

(2) omitted.

(3) Matters necessary for the scope of goods and services under paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17827, Dec. 30, 202)

(1) Export under Article 11 (1) 1 of the Act shall be as follows:

1. Shipping domestic goods (including the fishery products collected by Korean vessels) from a foreign country;

2. Where transactions, such as contract and receipt of consideration, are conducted at a domestic place of business, which falls under any of the following items:

(a) Export through relay trade under the Foreign Trade Act;

(b) Export on consignment under the Foreign Trade Act; and

(c) Foreigner-do exports under the Foreign Trade Act; and

(d) export by consignment processing trade methods under the Foreign Trade Act;

(2) Goods exported under Article 11 (1) 1 of the Act shall be deemed to include the following goods:

1. Goods supplied by a businessman by means of a local letter of credit or a written confirmation of purchase;

2. Not more than the omission;

Enforcement Rule of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 258 of April 12, 2002)

(1) For the purpose of Article 9-2 (2) 1 of the Decree and Article 26 (1) 2-2 of the Decree, the term “local letter of credit” means a letter of credit issued by the head of a foreign exchange bank upon request of the businessman, within 20 days after the end of the taxable period to which the time of supply for goods or services belongs, where the businessman wishes to be supplied with raw materials for export, goods for export, or export goods or processing services for export in the Republic of Korea.

(2) A written approval for purchase referred to in Article 24 (2) 1 of the Decree and Article 26 (1) 2-2 of the Decree means an approval issued by the head of a foreign exchange bank within 20 days after the end of the taxable period to which the time of supply for goods or services belongs, in accordance with