본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.01.13 2014구단10155

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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


1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 1, 2012, the Plaintiff engaged in wholesale business under the trade name B (hereinafter “B”) from May 1, 2012, and filed a tax return for KRW 20,695,933 on July 17, 2012, the Plaintiff reported the amount of tax refundable at KRW 20,695,933, on the ground that the Plaintiff purchased the clothing equivalent to KRW 201,052,050 of the supply value from Jatech Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Jatech”), upon filing a value-added tax return for the first time in July 17, 2012.

B. On December 3, 2012, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff that the Plaintiff would pay KRW 5,440,883 of the value-added tax for 1 December 3, 2012 by imposing KRW 6,031,561 without recognizing the Plaintiff’s above input tax deduction of KRW 20,105,205.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). C.

On June 27, 2013, the plaintiff appealed to the Tax Tribunal and filed a request for an inquiry, but was dismissed.

On July 8, 2013, the Plaintiff received a service of the foregoing adjudication decision and filed the instant lawsuit on October 1, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 4 through 6, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2-1, and Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff asserted that Nonparty C purchased a carry-over product under the name of Jinatech Coul Ltd. (hereinafter “Coul”) and exported it to Africa, etc. under the name of Jinatech in accordance with the agreement with Jinatech, and C was entitled to the deduction of the input tax amount of KRW 20,105,205 by fully depositing the transaction amount including value-added tax in Coul., Ltd. (hereinafter “Coul”), and Jinatech promised to return the amount equivalent to the above input tax amount by issuing a tax invoice in B established by the Plaintiff, a partner of C.

However, unlike the Jintech's promise, the Plaintiff does not issue a tax invoice on the ground that the company acquisition transaction is in progress, and it is inevitable for the Plaintiff to issue a tax invoice through the inquiries of the competent tax office.

Therefore, between the plaintiff and Jintech.