Whether the preparation of a double contract constitutes a fraud or other fraudulent act

(1) Since the fact that the Plaintiff reported value-added tax on the basis of the purchase price stated in the modified contract prepared differently from the fact that the amount of the purchase price was reduced compared to the existing sales contract regarding the apartment house at issue of this case is confirmed, and the Plaintiff submitted the modified contract to the Defendant based on its evidentiary materials, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiffs evaded value-added

Article 26-2 of the Framework Act on National Taxes (Period for Excluding Assessment of National Taxes)

2016Nu63509 Disposition to revoke the imposition of value-added tax.

Maap○

○ Head of tax office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2015Guhap5054 decided August 25, 2016

January 17, 2017

February 7, 2017

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. Each disposition of the Defendant imposed value-added tax of 000 won for the second term portion of 2004 against the Plaintiffs on October 1, 2013, value-added tax of 000 won for the first term portion of 2005, value-added tax of 2000 won for the second term portion of 2005, value-added tax of 000 won for the first term portion of 2006, value-added tax for the first term portion of 2006, and value-added tax for the first term portion of 207 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's explanation of this case is the same as the statement of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed in its entirety due to the lack of grounds.