Seoul High Court-2018-Nu-43691 ( November 09, 2018)

If it is found that the facts alleged in the facts of taxation requirements are revealed, it cannot be readily concluded that the pertinent taxation disposition is an unlawful disposition that does not meet the taxation requirements.

(C) In light of the above legal principles, the pertinent tax disposition cannot be readily concluded as an unlawful disposition that failed to meet the taxation requirements, unless it proves that the pertinent facts were not eligible for the application of the empirical rule, unless it proves that the pertinent facts were not eligible for the application of the empirical rule, although the burden of proof as to the facts of taxation requirements exists in a lawsuit seeking revocation of tax imposition.

Article 39 of the Value-Added Tax Act [Non-Deduction Purchase Tax Amount]

2018Du64900 Disposition of revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

AA

a) the Director of the Tax Office

March 14, 2019

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The lower judgment and the appellate brief all of the records of this case were examined, but the appellant’s grounds of appeal are examined.

The argument regarding the procedure of appeal does not include the reasons prescribed in the subparagraphs of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Procedure of Appeal.

The appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 5 of the same Act, since it is found that there is no reason or reason to do so;

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.