Whether a false tax invoice is a real transaction

There is no objective evidence to prove that a tax invoice was a real transaction, and therefore, it is just to constitute a loss, and it is not illegal to dispose of a bonus in the calculation of an amount including value added tax.

Article 67 of the Corporate Tax Act

Article 19 (Scope of Deductible Expenses)

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The decision of the first instance is revoked. The defendant's disposition of correction notice of value-added tax of 19,348,170 won for the first term of August 10, 2004 against the plaintiff, value-added tax of 19,348,170 won for the second term of 201, value-added tax of 13,466,180 won for the second term of 201, and corporate tax of 81,159,040 for the business year

1. The reasons why a party member should explain the instant case are as follows: (a) add “13-1,2 of the judgment of the first instance” No. 7 No. 13-2 of the judgment of the first instance; and (b) add “A 14-19 of the judgment of the first instance” to “A 14-2 of the judgment of the first instance; and (c) refer to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, as it is, under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act;

"The defendant, in relation to the purchase tax invoice of this case by the plaintiff (the plaintiff ○○, Inc., Ltd., on October 31, 2005, changed its trade name to ○○○), was separated from the amount of value added to the supply value and value-added tax, and to dispose of bonus thereafter, added the supply value of 181,034,400 won on the purchase tax invoice of this case and the income adjustment amount of 18,103,400 won to the gross income amount of 3,221,358,491 won which were originally included in the calculation of deductible expenses, shall be stated in the calculation of deductible expenses as 202,358,491 won, and the fact that the tax base of the corporate tax of this case was corrected by stating the above amount of value-added tax of 18,103,400 won (Evidence No. 3). As a result, the amount of income adjustment after deducting the supply value of the corporate tax of this case cannot be viewed as the income adjustment method of 181,4000 won.

2. If so, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.