Negligence of the fiduciary duty of an enterprise that has fulfilled due care;

In order to confirm actual transactions, where a business entity has made efforts such as confirmation of a customer's place of business, confirmation of details of transportation, details of transactions in the name of a customer, etc., it constitutes a fiduciary negligence on disguised transactions, unless there is a reasonable ground to prove that the

Article 16 of the Value Added Tax Act and Article 39 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

2012 disposition of revocation of the imposition of value-added tax

GG

O Head of tax office

1. The Defendant’s value-added tax for the first term of January 17, 2009 against the Plaintiff on January 17, 2012 KRW 181,307,150 for the first term of 209;

Each disposition of the value-added tax for the second period of 209, the value-added tax for the first period of 2009, the value-added tax for 137,004,640, and the value-added tax for the second period of 2010 shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Status of the parties

(1) As from July 4, 2006, AAA Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "AA") had been engaged in the non-ferrous metal manufacturing business at Onam-do OCO and OOCO on January 17, 2012, a decision was made on January 26, 201 by O District Court 201 Gohap00 to appoint a custodian for the commencement of rehabilitation procedures and the representative director BBB, and on January 26, 2012, BB was registered as a custodian.

2) The Plaintiff was holding 5% of the AA shares from 2005 to 2011, and the status of holding AA shares during the said period is as follows.

(b) taxation on AA;

(1) AA receives a tax invoice (hereinafter referred to as each of the tax invoices of this case) corresponding to the purchase details in each of the following table (hereinafter referred to as "each of the tax invoices of this case") from each of the purchasing parties listed in the following table from the first to the second taxable period in 2009, and then deducts the input tax amount under each of the above tax invoices from the output tax amount, and files a return on the value-added tax for the pertinent taxable period for the defendant. (2) The defendant on December 1, 201, and submitted a false tax invoice to AA on December 1, 201, and issued a false tax invoice to each of the transaction parties of this case [the false tax invoice].

Each of the tax invoices of this case received from each of the above transaction parties denies the deduction of the input tax amount, on the grounds that it is not true, and the amount of value-added tax for the first period of 2009 (3,520,520,527,270, value-added tax for the second period of 209 (10,524,797,500, value-added tax for the second period of 2009, value-added tax for the first period of 2010,60,284,400, and value-added tax for the second period of 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the "first disposition").

(c) Designation of secondary taxpayers and imposition of value-added taxes;

"AAA was in arrears with the value-added tax pursuant to the first disposition of this case, and the Defendant, based on Article 39 subparagraph 2 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 11845, May 28, 2013), designated the Plaintiff as the second taxpayer on January 3, 2012. On January 17, 2009, according to the Plaintiff's share ratio in the first-term value-added tax of 181,307,150, and the second-term value-added tax of 2009, among the amount in arrears with the second-term value-added tax of 182,027,060, and the first-term value-added tax of 137,04,640, and 231,380, among the amount in arrears with the second-term value-added tax of 2010, the Plaintiff dismissed the Plaintiff's appeal 29,2017.

[In the absence of dispute with recognition, Gap evidence 1, 2, 6 through 8, Eul evidence 1 to 6, 31

Each entry, including number, and the purport of the whole pleading.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) Violation of the first disposition of this case

Since AA purchased waste Dong, etc. corresponding to the value of supply listed in each of the instant tax invoices from each of the instant transaction parties, each of the instant tax invoices does not constitute a false tax invoice. Even if each of the instant transaction parties falls under the so-called data, AA was unable to know such fact at the time of the past transaction, and directly visited and confirm the office at the time of commencement of transaction, and paid the price to each of the transaction parties, and written a written confirmation stating the date of measurement, vehicle number, name, weight, weight, volume, quantity, etc. at each transaction, and written the driver’s signature and telephone number in the written confirmation, it is difficult to deem that AA was negligent. Accordingly, the disposition against AA, which is the premise of the instant disposition, is unlawful, and the disposition of this case is also unlawful.

2) Illegal disposition of the instant case

Even if the first disposition of this case is lawful, since the Plaintiff was entrusted by BB on May 27, 1995 with the name of the Plaintiff and the actual owner was BB, the instant disposition imposed by the Plaintiff on the premise that the Plaintiff is the actual owner of the said shares is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Whether the first disposition of this case is unlawful

A) Facts of recognition

(1) CCC (DD)

① On April 2, 2009, CCC registered a non-ferrous metal wholesale trade under the trade name of DD, but was closed on August 9, 2010, after failing to pay the amount equivalent to the value-added tax 3.5 billion won in the second year of 2009 and the income tax 1.1 billion won in the year of 2009.

2) CCC has worked for approximately one year in EE (FF in case of the Director General) that is a non-ferrous firm that was found to be engaged in entertainment tavern and Sejong Deputy Business and who was accused of false number of tax invoices, and for about one year.

Business registration was made as DD one week prior to the report of business closure of EE Co., Ltd.

Third, at the time of business registration, the lessor stated the lease agreement on the OOdong 111, which is a workplace, as "GGG", but as a result of confirmation of the certified copy of the register, GGG was found to be not a co-owner of the said land. Since CCC reported that it had moved its workplace to OO-dong 92-7, it was written on June 30, 2009 on the above land lease agreement as of June 30, 201." The contract date was written on June 30, 201.

⑤ CCC (DDD) reported each amount of KRW 39,350,076,00 as sales for the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009, and KRW 3,292,373,00 as sales for the first taxable period of value-added tax in 2010, and KRW 5,413,368,00 as sales for the first taxable period of value-added tax in 2010, but did not pay value-added tax accordingly.

6. CCC shall make a shipment in cash each time the sales amount is deposited in its own account.

However, there is no specific documentary evidence about the user.

④ In 209 and 2010, the director of the regional tax office and the director of the regional tax office conducted an investigation into the CCC on a suspected suspect. CCC did not submit materials proving the purchase amount corresponding to the actual purchase and sale of goods despite asserting that it was a transaction that actually purchased or sold goods, and the customer reported to the principal purchaser was identified as materials that received only a tax invoice without a real transaction. Accordingly, CCC filed a criminal charge on data.

(2) PPP Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "PPP")

① From March 30, 2006, PPP commenced the business of OO-Gu O-dong No. 413 O-dong store 104 commercial buildings as non-ferrous metal wholesale and retail business, sales was entirely closed on September 7, 2009 when there was no record of purchase until the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2008.

② 대표이사로 등기된 QQQ은 일용노동경력만 있을 뿐 고철도매업에 종사한 적이 없고，폐업 전인 2009. 7. 27. 출국하였으며, 등기부상 감사인 RRR는 건설업에 종사하는 일용근로자로 자신이 감사로 등기된 사실을 전혀 알지 못하였으며, 2009년 3-4월경 게임장에서 알게 된 성명불상자에게 인감증명서 등을 건네준 사실이 있을 뿐 위 법인을 전혀 알지 못하는 것으로 밝혀졌다.

On April 7, 2009, the lessor entered into a lease agreement with the head of the outdoor site (OO-gu O-dong 3-48) around April 7, 2009, but did not have any details of the entry and departure of the goods at the site, and at August 2009, the lessor sent a certificate that the contract will be terminated on or after August 2009 because he did not pay monthly rent."

⑤ PPP reported sales of KRW 10,122,949,00 for the first taxable period of value-added tax in 2009, and KRW 57,357,00 for the purchase amount, and KRW 3,773,102,00 for sales in the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009 for the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009.

(6) The amount remitted from a seller shall be withdrawn in cash on the day or a day, or transferred in cash to another account of the PPP, and thus withdrawn in cash on the day, but no evidentiary document for the user shall be submitted.

7) In light of the fact that PPP is unable to submit all the purchase data corresponding to sales, Korea-Japan and limited liability companies reported as its main purchaser, there is no high-speed metal transport record, and the form of transactions claimed by the PP is obviously contrary to transaction practices, the head of the OOO made an accusation against the PP and the representative director.

(3) SSS Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as SS)

① On July 13, 2009, SS was registered as a wholesale and retail business of non-ferrous metal on the OOOOO on the 322-1, and 2nd floor. After reporting the second value-added tax in 2009, the representative was cut off contact, and the workplace was left abandoned for a long time.

② TT registered as the representative director did not have previously been engaged in the closed-down business, and there was no property, and UU registered as the auditor was confirmed to have issued a certificate of seal impression upon the request of TT with the post-ship distribution.

The lessor of the third place of business paid rent in August 2009, and then tried to contact with the representative, but was cut off."The fourth place of business, "AA", and the fourth place of business accepted a total of 58 tax invoices from August 4, 2009 to October 22, 2009, and issued a corresponding tax invoice.

⑤ SS reported 8,761,74,000 won, and 25,000,000 won, with respect to the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009 (the specific period from July 8, 2009 to September 30, 2009), and the only place of sales of SS was AA.

6. At each time the sales amount is deposited from AA to the SS account, the sales amount is withdrawn in cash or transferred from SS to another account and withdrawn in cash again, but there is no evidentiary document on the place of use in cash.

(7) The director of the OO shall investigate SS as a suspect of the second material in 2009.

In addition, the customer who reported the base metal to the purchasing agency was unable to submit the transport records proving the transaction with base metal at all, and the transaction method was judged as a processing transaction in light of this example, and the purchase data corresponding to the waste sales was not submitted at all. Accordingly, the director of the OOO filed a complaint against SS and the representative TT.

(4) HH (IIIM)

① On February 6, 2009, HH had registered the business of OO-dong O-dong O-dong 585-5 to III (the opening date of February 1, 2009) and closed on January 29, 2010. HH had been engaged in the business of collecting and selling closed Dongs from around 2000 to July 25, 2008, and had been issued tax invoices corresponding to the supply price of 18,66,794,500 Dongdong, which H had been the supplier, and had been issued from March 11, 209 to March 231, 2005.

③ H reported the sales amount of KRW 26,738,00,000 for the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009, and the purchase amount of KRW 22,169,00,000 for the second taxable period of value-added tax. He paid only part of the value-added tax (the amount equivalent to KRW 142,00,000).

(4) HH shall pay in cash the full amount of the amount remitted from the seller, immediately, and shall not verify evidence as to the place of use.

⑤ As a result of investigating HH in relation to the second trade order in 2009, and from the tax invoice received by HH, HH was subject to a disposition of false accusation (Evidence of evidence) for the aggregate of the supply value of KRW 26,369,00,000 (98.6%) and the purchase tax invoice (97.1%) equivalent to KRW 21,525,00,000 in total of the supply value of the tax invoice received by HH, which was received by the Commissioner of the Regional Tax Office.

7) On December 13, 201, HH was sentenced to a violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (tax) and a fine of 1.5 billion won due to the violation of the Punishment of Specific Crimes (tax), and the violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, on April 26, 2012, HH was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 4 years and a fine of 1.5 billion won in imprisonment in the appellate court of 2012No. 2012No. 2012. On September 27, 2012, H was dismissed by Supreme Court Decision 2012Do1234 Decided September 27, 201, on the ground that “The criminal facts were purchased at the first half of 2004, and JJ” on the ground that it did not request transaction data, such as the tax invoice for the first half of 2008, and purchased at the second half of 201 billion won or more by reporting the purchase of the former tax amount of 1.5 billion won or more by means of value-added.

(5) KK Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "K")

① On October 19, 2009, KK registered the business of the non-ferrous metal wholesale and retail business at the place of business of 00 -0 - 00 - 59 - 2 on October 19, 2009, but the representative director did not pay the second value-added tax in 2009 and went into China on January 29, 201 and was closed ex officio on January 31, 2010.

② On July 6, 2009, the representative director entered the Republic of Korea in 4-5 years prior to the entry of Chinese prisoners of war, who had no experience in engaging in the business related to the closed operation, and the auditor and the representative director are in the matrimonial relationship, and there was no record of issuing the certificate of registration of seal imprint upon the request of the representative director.

③ On October 5, 2009, the lessor of the office of KK entered into a lease agreement and received a rent for up to 12 months, but did not pay the monthly payment in January 2010, and confirmed that the office was transferred without permission by visiting the office, and sent the certificate of content to the representative, but returned.

In addition, the owner of KK stated that he only consulted about the lease contract with the representative of KK, but did not conclude the contract. In addition, the lease contract for the above site was confirmed that the lessor's resident number and name were false.

④ AAA shall accept each of the supply price of KRW 3,503,310,50 on 23 occasions during a total of 67 occasions from October 23, 2009 to December 31, 2009, equivalent to the supply price of KRW 8,757,614,250, and the supply price of KRW 3,503,310,500 for 23 occasions from January 7, 2010 to January 25, 2010, and received tax invoices equivalent to the above amounts.

⑤ On the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009, KK reported 8,757,614,O00 as sales amount, 30,010,000 as purchase amount, and 3,503,310,000 as sales amount, and 10,300,000 as purchase amount, respectively, in the first taxable period of value-added tax in 2010, KK reported 3,503,30,000 as sales amount. The only sales amount of KK was AA.

(6) When the sales amount is deposited from AA to the account of KK, it shall be withdrawn in cash or transferred to another account of KK and withdrawn in cash again, but there shall be no documentary evidence of the place of use in cash.

7) The director of the OO and the director of the regional tax office of the OO shall investigate KK with regard to the second period of 2009 and the first transaction order of 2010. KK shall be deemed a processed transaction only if it was unable to submit all the purchase data corresponding to its sales, and if it was investigated with regard to the purchaser, it shall be deemed that it was a processed transaction if it did not submit all the materials proving the transport record, etc.

KK and its representative were accused.

(6) LL (MM)

① LL, on October 20, 2009, LL opened non-ferrous metal wholesale and retail business with the trade name of MM from OO-dong 507-3 Miscellaneous land of 839 square meters in O-si, O-si, 2009.

② At the time of filing an application for business registration, LL submitted a lease agreement with NN on August 1, 2009. However, the above lease agreement was forged. NN leased the above land and OO-dong 505-4 miscellaneous land l,948 square meters to V, and VV sublet sublet the above land to WW (LL’s pro rata) and WW re-transfer the above land to LLL without permission.

③ AAA accepted a total of 51 times from October 27, 2009 to December 30, 2009 the supply value of 8,530,675,590 won, which LL is the supplier, and received a tax invoice. The scale of each transaction was at least KRW 100 million, except once.

④ LL reported 17,290,000,000 as sales for the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009, and reported only the transportation cost of 42,000,000 won as sales, and the value-added tax was not paid.

(5) The LL was alleged to have paid in cash immediately after the total amount of the money remitted by the seller, and that it was paid in cash to the purchaser, but it was not submitted supporting documents.

④ In light of the fact that the director of the regional tax office conducted an investigation into LL for each item of general value-added tax at the second time in 2009, the director of the regional tax office filed an accusation against LL based on the fact that there was no actual purchase in addition to the transportation cost, and the transaction partner who reported the transportation cost as the purchaser did not know the LL and made it impossible to disclose it.

No. 201, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2010, No. 2015

① Around June 24, 2009, an OO-gu O-dong 259-1, the place of business of OO-si, opened a wholesale and retail business for YY. After that, the place of business was around October 12, 2009, the place of business was changed to the O-gu O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O.

③ AAA took over 18 times in total from November 19, 2009 to December 29, 2009 the supply value of 2,500,742,500 won, which the person who is a supplier at the same time is a supplier, and received a tax invoice corresponding to each of the above amounts.

④ In the first taxable period of the value-added tax in 2010, an amount of KRW 57,263,00,000 was reported as sales amount, KRW 60,425,00,000 as purchase amount, and KRW 59.7 billion out of the purchase amount was not an input tax amount subject to deduction, and ultimately, the value-added tax to be paid at the first taxable period of 200,000 won was a value-added tax for the first taxable period of the value-added tax in 2010. Nevertheless, the said amount was closed on September 10, 2010 without paying it at all.

⑤ At each time the sales amount is deposited into the account, most of the relevant accounts were withdrawn in cash, and there is no evidentiary document as to the place of use of cash so withdrawn.

6) After investigating a person suspected of committing a crime on the first-stage material in 2010, the director of the regional tax office of OO filed a charge of the tax accounting for the first time in 2010, regarding the supply price of approximately KRW 57.3 billion issued in the first taxable period of value in 2010, and the purchase tax for the first time in 2010, about KRW 430,000,000 of the supply price received in connection with the purchase of waste, all the tax invoices for the purchase of KRW 57.3 billion

(8) Z (a)(a)

① On July 19, 2006, the Z was registered as a non-ferrous metal wholesale trade, and closed on June 23, 2009.

② In collusion with the CC of bb, the Z has leased its business registration certificate and has managed the account by others, issued false sales tax invoices equivalent to KRW 1,713,00,000 from the first to the second period from 2007 to the second period from 2008, and the o regional tax office has been accused of false purchase tax invoices equivalent to KRW 655,00,000 on the data, and there was a history of being sentenced to 2 years of imprisonment with labor for 8 months from the date of accusation from the o regional tax office. The Z has been engaged in the operation of small-scale scrap metal or the work for collecting scrap metal before the above business registration. ③ At the time of business registration, OO-70-156 reported by the ZZ as the place of business at the time of business.

④ AA has taken over the closed Dong equivalent to KRW 2,432,418,050, in total, 31 times from March 25, 2009 to May 15, 2009, the supply value of which is the Z as the supplier, and received a tax invoice corresponding thereto.

⑤ The accounts in the name of Z and Zdddi were all opened in March through May 2009, and both were terminated in May through June 2009. The 14 companies issuing sales tax invoices, including AA, remitted the money to the said account, and the money received was remitted to or withdrawn in cash from some individuals related to the act of data. There is no specific evidence on the source of cash withdrawn.

④ The Head of the District Tax Office reported 3,444,786,00 won as sales amount for the first taxable period of the value-added tax in 2009, and 12,222,00 won as purchase amount. The head of the District Tax Office conducted the Z on the first data in 2009. The Z did not submit the data corresponding to the purchase, and filed an accusation against the ZZ on the data because the details of the account transaction did not confirm.

(9) e(e)(e)(e)(e)(hereinafter referred to as e)

① The e was established on September 24, 2009 for the purpose of collecting and selling scrap metal, and on October 13, 2009, the e was closed on May 31, 2010.

② Representative Fff was a person who was engaged in daily work, and had never been engaged in the business related to the closed operation before, and had never been engaged in the business related to the closed operation, and had no real estate or financial property. After reporting the second value-added tax in 2009, contact was cut down, and left China on November 25, 2009. Officers listed in the registry are reasons for the said gg, and there was no employee reported as a worker.

③ There was a 7th degree of assembly-type office in a place of business located in ooo-Eup 1006, and was left in a long-term closed door. According to the lessor and neighboring business operators, continuous contact was not made after the contract, and door was temporarily set off in the second half of 2009. There was no vehicle access in the second half of 2009.

④ AA took over 10 times in total from October 21, 2009 to November 2, 2009, a tax invoice corresponding thereto was issued.

⑤ e filed a return of KRW 6,415,830,00 as sales for the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009, and KRW 1,01,596,00 as purchase amount, but did not pay the value-added tax accordingly.

6. When the amount of sales is deposited into a corporate account, e has been transferred to the hhh account or to the e's other account, and most of e has been withdrawn in cash, and there is no evidentiary document as to the place of use in cash.

(E) The Director of the District Tax Office investigated e as a suspect on the Second Data in 2009, and e did not submit any purchase data corresponding to e, e was confirmed as a material of hhhdo reported to the buyer, and the rest of the buyer is difficult to deem that there was a real transaction, and filed an accusation against e and its representative.

(10) Company III (hereinafter referred to as “III”) shall be

① On November 28, 2008, 3 registered the wholesale and steel retail business with 1013o-dong 197-28o building as the location of the business place, and closed on October 22, 2009 (the opening of October 1, 2008).

② In March 2008, upon the investigation of suspected suspicions of receiving the second processing data conducted by the director of the District Tax Office from March 2008, and around October 2009, the first data investigation conducted around October 2009 and the first data investigation conducted around October 2009, there was a record of accusation as part of the data.

③ The representative is a delinquent taxpayer who was accused of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act on July 31, 2009 and January 25, 2010.

④ AA acquired a total of three times from April 10, 2009 to April 22, 2009, a tax invoice corresponding to each of the above amounts was issued.

⑤ On the second taxable period of value-added tax in 2009, 3,48,830,000 won as sales amount, 3,223,354,00 won as purchase amount, 3,223,354,00 won as sales amount, 3,00 won as to the second taxable period of value-added tax in 209, and 3,000 won as to 2,00 won as to 3,00 won as to 2,000 won as to 2,000 won, 3,000

(11) jj (k)

① j registered the business of non-reficial wholesale and retail trade with the name of 'kk', oo-dong 414-2, oo-dong o-dong 414-2.

② AAA has taken over 320,798.900 won in value of supply thatj is the supplier on two occasions in total from November 17, 2009 to November 27, 2009, and has received tax invoices corresponding to each of the above amounts.

(12) Doll Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Doll").

① On September 4, 2009 (the opening of August 1, 2009) after the establishment of August 28, 2009, L having registered non-ferrous metal wholesale and retail business, but closed the business on November 20, 2010.

② On February 2, 2010, “Oo-dong 40o-dong 40o-dong 729” was changed from January 19, 2010 to “Oo-dong 2911” at the time of opening the business. On the other hand, from January 19, 2010 to o-dong 2911, o-dong o-dong 291 was used as a leased office, but at that place, o-dong o-dong 2911 was working as a mm employee, and o-dong o-dong 2911 was found.

Meanwhile, from December 19, 2008 to April 18, 2009, the office of the Dong was found to have leased the mmm of the corporation from the next day to January 18, 2010.

The third representative director (from March 26, 2010 to November 20, 2010) stated to the effect that "3rd representative director (from March 26, 2010 to November 20, 2010) was not carrying out business affairs related to l ballot and there was no awareness of the management of the said corporation. In particular, at the time of the investigation by the head of the Songpa District Tax Office, he stated to the effect that "at the time of the investigation, only the person was acting as the representative of the corporation and there was no awareness of the overall matters of the corporation, such as the situation of payment of transaction," "The representative director and employees reported on the details of withholding at mlm from July 2009 to October 2010 opened the Ll's account and issued the Ll's tax invoice, and it was confirmed that the vehicle owned by mlm was used in the transportation of the vehicle in the name of l ballot.

⑤ On October 21, 2009 and on November 2, 2009, AAA accepted 211,949,640 won, which is the 211st century’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s embl’s purchase

(6) When money is deposited from the place of sale to the account under the name of the place of sale, the money was deposited in cash on the day or on the several days, and most of the money clients were confirmed to be the representative and employees of the light metal, and there is no specific evidentiary document on the place of cash use withdrawn.

7) In 209, from 2009 to 2010, the head of theo District Tax Office investigated the suspect on the data on the transaction during the second scheduled period, and judged that all the sales tax invoices were received in a false manner without real transaction, and accused the representative of the ml, representative, and employees of the ml, and the employees of the ml.

〜중략〜

Recognizing the recognition of Gap 12, 18, 23, 28, 33, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 57, 60, 64, 69, 73, 77, 82;

86, 90, 94, 99, 104, 109, 114, 119, 17 through 29, 33 through 37, each entry

The purport of all pleadings

B) Whether each of the instant tax invoices is false

(1) Relevant legal principles

Article 17(2)2 of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that input tax shall not be deducted from the output tax amount in cases where the entries of a tax invoice are different from the fact. The meaning that the entries of a tax invoice are different from the fact, and refers to cases where the contents of the requisite entries of a tax invoice do not coincide with those of the person who actually supplied or is supplied with the goods or services, regardless of the formal descriptions of the transaction contract, etc. prepared between the parties to the goods or services (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Nu617, Dec. 10, 196)

Whether a specific transaction constitutes the supply of goods as prescribed by the Value-Added Tax Act in a series of transactions must be determined individually and specifically by comprehensively taking into account various circumstances, such as the purpose and manner of the transaction partner, the subject to whom profits accrue, and the payment relationship of consideration, etc., depending on each transaction, and the burden of proving that the tax invoice received in the course of the transaction constitutes a "tax invoice different from the fact provided for in Article 17(2)2 of the Value-Added Tax Act to which the deduction of the input tax amount is denied on the ground that the specific transaction is a nominal transaction for which no actual delivery or transfer of goods is made (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Du13446, Jun. 23, 200

〜중략〜

C) AA is aware of the ship's . non-performance;

(1) The actual supplier and the supplier on a tax invoice may not deduct or refund the input tax amount unless there are special circumstances that the supplier was unaware of the nominal name of the tax invoice and that there was no negligence on the part of the supplier, and that the supplier was not aware of the fact that there was no negligence on the part of the supplier (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du2277, Jun. 28, 2002). However, in the case of waste resources, such as waste vehicles, it cannot be deemed that the supplier has the duty to actively investigate whether the other party is a disguised entrepreneur due to the characteristics of the distribution structure and transaction, and there is sufficient reason to suspect that the other party is a disguised entrepreneur in light of the facts revealed in the process of collecting data to determine whether the other party is a person eligible for transaction (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Nu7660, Sept. 30, 197).

(2) In full view of the respective descriptions of the instant case and the entire purport of the arguments in each film of the following facts, each of the following facts is recognized in light of the health stand, and of the evidence of Nos. 12 to 27, 33 to 40, 45 to 52, 60 to 76, 82 to 123 (including each number number):

1. AA receives a delivery proposal from the other transaction parties of this case and receives a business registration certificate, passbook copies, identification card copies, and the name cards of the representative before commencing the transaction.

② In addition, the directors or representatives of the AA directly visited and confirmed most of the business sites of the rest of the instant transaction parties, and affix or keep on-site photographs, such as signboards, on-site photographs, etc., even if not.

③ At each time a vehicle is supplied by the rest of the instant transaction parties, AAA confirmed the actual weight by type of waste, etc., and prepared a measurement confirmation by determining the supply price through the process to determine the quantity of human resources, and prepared a written confirmation, stating the measurement date, vehicle number, business name, and weight, and the entry and exit of the vehicle, and the screen tallying sheet stating the vehicle’s class and weight.

④ AA remitted the value of supply calculated by measurement to a passbook in the name of each transaction partner on the date close to the date of issuance of the tax invoice.

(3) In full view of the above facts, ① AA was making efforts to verify whether the other transaction with the other transaction parties was actually engaged in the business of closing, etc. before commencement of the transaction with the other transaction parties, ② AA made efforts to confirm whether the actual goods have been transported from the other transaction parties of this case even in the course of the supply of closing, etc. from the other transaction parties of this case; ③ AAA was deemed to have been normally remitted to the other transaction parties of this case; ④ there was no abnormal transaction, such as that the unit price of closing, etc. supplied by AA from the other transaction parties of this case is considerably less than the general transaction price, ④ there was no evidence to presume that AA had been significantly less than the general transaction price. In addition, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff was not aware that the name of the supplier of each tax invoice of this case was different from the actual supplier, and that there was no negligence in not knowing such fact since it fulfilled its duty of due care.

"(4) The Defendant, as the waste resources of high-priced, has been supplied for a considerable period of time, AAA has been engaged in closed-end transactions, so it was well aware of the structure of supply of waste consent, distribution routes, forms of transaction and transaction data, and risks thereof. The remainder of the transaction in this case was conducted with a big amount of transaction between the new and new companies which registered their business before several months, and between the two parties in this case (see the table below). In the case of some of the rest of the transaction in this case, it was hard to see that there was no photograph of the place of business prior to the place of business, or photographs of some parts of the closed-end and necessary facilities were installed, and it was hard to see where some photographs were installed for wholesale business, and the Plaintiff did not appear even though the representative visited all the companies, and it was doubtful that there was no small-scale visit of the company at the time of the investigation, and that there was no suspicion that there was a direct transaction between A and AA on-site visit and the representative of the company at the time of this case."

Since AA is made, the intermediate world directly traded with it in the case of AA is a normal company.

Furthermore, it is difficult to confirm the so-called "purchase route of waste metal" that the intermediary purchased waste metal (small scrap metal) from the confirming point of view that it is difficult to verify the so-called "purchase route of waste metal," as trade secrets of customers, and also it is highly likely that it will not be disclosed as trade secrets of customers, and that the closure agreement is closed at each page for the reduction of transportation costs and convenience of transactions and carrying them directly at one's own place of business and at the same time with the delivery of a tax invoice. Thus, it is not difficult to conclude that the waste agreement cannot be a supplier of the waste because it has no field of deposit, nor can it be concluded that there is any negligence on the part of the supplier who purchased the waste metal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da175010, Jan. 16, 2005).

This part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is with merit.

2) Therefore, the instant disposition, based on the premise that the instant first disposition is lawful, is rendered by the Plaintiff.

The remaining arguments are illegal without having to be examined.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and all of them are accepted, and it is so decided as per Disposition.