Whether it constitutes a nominal transaction related to the purchase of gold bullion

It is difficult to conclude that sales and purchase are not normal solely on the ground that the facts charged to an investigation agency on suspicion of material and the suspension of indictment was imposed. The fact that approval was made in the course of transactions, etc., and thus, the sales and purchase is not normal.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

44 44 44 44 44 45 44 444 64 44

1. The defendant's rejection disposition against the plaintiff on March 31, 2009 against the plaintiff on the additional return and payment of global income tax in 2004 shall be revoked.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

쇠鹬 쇠鹬 3000 쇠鹬 3000

1. Details of the disposition;

(a) ABB on September 1, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as “BB”);

A. In 2004, the purchase tax invoice of KRW 132,852,00 (hereinafter referred to as "CC") received fromCC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "CC") during the 2nd VAT taxable period shall be deemed to be a tax invoice for processing that does not have any real transaction, and the BB shall be notified of the amount of value-added tax 23,367,000 for the second taxable period of 2004, and shall be notified of the change in the amount of income by disposing of the amount of KRW 146,137,00 as a bonus as the representative director and notification of the change in the amount of income.

B. Accordingly, on November 30, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a revised return and voluntarily paid global income tax amounting to KRW 37,890,870 for the year 2004, and on January 21, 2009, the Plaintiff asserted that the transaction under the instant tax invoice was the actual transaction, and filed a request for correction for the refund of global income tax that was voluntarily paid, but the Defendant rejected on March 31, 2009 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

Facts that there is no dispute over the ground for I Recognition, entries in Gap evidence 1-1, 2, and 3-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

BB purchased gold bullion amounting to KRW 132,852,00 fromCC during the second taxable period of the value-added tax in 2004. Therefore, the instant disposition that was based on the premise that the instant tax invoice is a tax invoice for processing that is not a real transaction is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

(1) The reason that a specific transaction is a nominal transaction without actual delivery or transfer of goods.

In principle, the burden of proving that the tax invoice received in the course of such transaction constitutes a “tax invoice different from the fact” under Article 17(2)1-2 of the Value-Added Tax Act, where the input tax deduction is denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Du9737, Dec. 11, 2008).

(2) Fully considering the aforementioned legal principles and the purport of the evidence Nos. 2 and 3 as well as the entire pleadings.

In light of the following circumstances, it cannot be readily concluded that the instant tax invoice transaction between the Plaintiff andCC is merely a nominal transaction, and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise, solely on the ground thatCC, etc., in transaction with BBB, filed a complaint with an investigation agency on the charge of material facts and received suspension of indictment.

(A) Not only was the settlement of the price for the instant tax invoice between the Plaintiff andCC, but also it appears that the Plaintiff had sold and purchased gold bullion purchased and sold fromCC between the Plaintiff and the third transaction partner.

(B) The Plaintiff is a disguised nominal transaction for the purpose of evadingCC and tax.

There is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge whether there is an active contest.

(C) BBB filed a lawsuit against the Director of the Tax Office seeking the revocation of a value-added tax assessment disposition on the premise that the instant tax invoice is false (Seoul Administration)

The court 2009Guhap20106) and the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2009Nu39775) won.

(3) Therefore, on the premise that the instant tax invoice is a tax invoice for processing without a real transaction

The instant disposition is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so ordered as per Disposition by admitting it.

shall be ruled.