1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is "the legitimacy of the disposition 2." of the judgment of the court of first instance.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the part of the judgment (excluding the 4th to 6th 8th 13th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th

[Supplementary part] [Article 4 (Exclusion from Table) 13 to 6]

D. Determination 1) Article 39(1)2 of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that an input tax amount shall not be deducted from the output tax amount in a case where the entries in a tax invoice are different from the facts. In such a case, the meaning that it is different from the fact is that the ownership of income, profit, calculation, act or transaction, which is the object of taxation, is nominal, and if there is another person to whom it actually belongs, the person to whom it actually belongs shall be liable for tax payment and the disposition of this case is lawful in light of the purport of Article 14(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes that provides that the necessary entries in a tax invoice are inconsistent with those in the transaction contract, etc. prepared between the parties to the goods or service, notwithstanding the formal entries in the transaction contract, etc. prepared between the parties to the transaction, the person who actually supplies or is supplied with the goods or service, the price, and the timing of the transaction (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Nu617, Dec. 10, 1996).

(1) The truth of documentary evidence for determining value-added taxes, which is to be issued and delivered at the time of trading, shall be true.