Unless special circumstances exist, evidence in a criminal trial is recognized in an administrative trial.

Unlike the facts found guilty in the criminal judgment which became final and conclusive, it is difficult to view that there was an actual transaction, such as the contents of each tax invoice of this case, between the Plaintiff and the requesting corporation, and there is no evidence

Article 16 of the Value-Added Tax Act

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax against the Plaintiff on February 1, 2007, KRW 3,782,600 for the second term in 2001, KRW 2,884,410 for the first term in 202, KRW 5,295,670 for the second term in 2002, and KRW 277,560 for the first term in 203 shall be revoked, respectively.

1. Circumstances of dispositions;

The following facts may be acknowledged by integrating the descriptions of Gap evidence 1, 3, Gap evidence 4-1 through 4, Gap evidence 5, Gap evidence 7-1 through 30, Eul evidence 1-1 through 4, and the whole purport of pleadings:

A. From January 26, 1999, the Plaintiff: (a) was a business operator who had been engaged in precious metal retail business with the trade name of ○○○○○○○○ from around 26, 199; (b) from February 2, 2001 to 1, 2003, 61,243,167 won in total from the purchase tax invoice of KRW 30 (10 for February 2, 2001, total amount of KRW 17,872,95, KRW 14,237,98, KRW 11, total amount of KRW 27,382, value-added tax; and (c) purchased each of the above input tax invoices from 10 for February 2, 2002, KRW 17,174, value-added tax; and (d) purchased each of the above input tax invoices; and (e) purchased each of the above input tax invoices.

B. However, the Defendant issued each notice of value-added tax from February 1, 2007 to January 2003, on the ground that each of the tax invoices of this case, which the Plaintiff received from ○○○ Fund, is a data data and the Plaintiff received from ○○ Fund, without deducting the input tax amount on each of the tax invoices of this case, and revising the value-added tax, on the ground that it is a processed tax invoice without any real transaction (hereinafter “instant disposition of imposition”).

C. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, but was dismissed on May 22, 2008.

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Each of the instant tax invoices received by the Plaintiff was prepared according to the actual transaction, and thus, each of the instant tax invoices, based on the premise that each of the instant tax invoices is a processing transaction, is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

Article 16 (Tax Invoice)

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

(c) Fact of recognition;

In full view of the evidence mentioned above as evidence Nos. 2, 3-1, 2-2-2-3, 4, 5, 6-7-1, 2-2-8 through 10, and 11-1 through 8 of evidence Nos. 11-8, and the whole purport of the arguments mentioned above, the following facts may be acknowledged:

1) While ○○○ is the representative in terms of business registration, the actual representative is ○○ (from January 16, 2001 to July 2, 2002) and Kim○ (from July 2, 2002 to the closure of business).

2) The director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office, upon conducting a tax investigation on ○○ gold, processed the amount of KRW 127,081,081,127,397 won (2,762 companies, sales tax invoices 24,852) out of the total sales amount of KRW 257,79,000 reported by the head of the Seoul Regional Tax Office from January 1, 2001 to January 1, 2004, in order to disguise the normal sales, the amount of KRW 00 in the form of a processed sales. In addition, the amount of KRW 62,732,92,178 was disposed of by the method of collecting fees from the employee’s implied who received the payment in the name of the processing trading office or deposited the fees from the processing trading office, without actually selling the current credit card sales in the form of a credit card sales slip and repurchasing it at a lower rate of KRW 2,000 (3.6%).

3) On the other hand, on November 2, 2004, at the time of investigating data on the ○○○○○○ Fund, the instant tax invoice issued to the Plaintiff was confirmed to have been based on the processed transaction without real transaction.

4) According to the reasoning that ○○○ and ○○○ issued processed sales tax invoices while actually managing ○○○, each of the instant tax invoices is included in the final judgment of conviction related to the issuance of processed sales tax invoices for ○○○ and Kim Jae-ho (Seoul Western District Court 2004Gohap368, Seoul Western District Court 2004Gohap368, 2005Gohap2, 42, 49 (Consolidated), Seoul Western High Court 2006No62, 2006Do7681), and all of the instant tax invoices in the final judgment of conviction related to the issuance of processed sales tax invoices for ○○ and Kim Jae-ho.

D. Determination

1) The burden of proving that the tax invoice is false, in principle, to the defendant who is the tax office having the burden of proving that the tax invoice is false. Thus, the defendant must prove that the tax invoice is not accompanied by real transactions on the basis of direct evidence or circumstances. If the defendant has proved to the extent that he reasonably acceptable, it is necessary to prove that the tax invoice is not false and that it is easy for the plaintiff who is the taxpayer to present evidence and materials related to the defendant's disposition to the extent that it is reasonable reasonable and acceptable. In addition, in the administrative trial, it is not bound by the fact-finding of the criminal trial. In addition, even if the administrative trial is not based on the fact-finding of the criminal trial, the fact-finding which has already been established as a crime of a criminal trial is not a significant evidence, and thus, it cannot be acknowledged that it is inconsistent with the fact-finding of the criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the administrative trial unless special circumstances exist (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da4294, Apr. 29, 1997).

2) However, the fact that ○○ Fund issued each of the tax invoices of this case to the Plaintiff without real transaction is already determined as a conviction of related criminal cases. As seen in the above recognition statement, ○○ Fund transferred the price or ○○ Fund deposited it in the name of the processing trade company through employees’ consent to disguise the actual transaction. In particular, according to each of subparagraphs 1-1 through 8 of the evidence No. 11-8, it is recognized that ○○ has made a payment by proxy in the name of the Plaintiff, in light of the fact that ○○ was recognized that ○○ has made a payment by proxy in the name of the Plaintiff, the evidence No. 2-1, 2 (written evidence No. 2), 6-1 through 4 (written evidence No. 6), and 8-1 through 4 (the current status of purchase and sale of ○ Funds), unlike the fact that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff was found guilty in the criminal judgment, each of the instant tax invoices cannot be deemed legitimate, and there is no evidence otherwise from the premise that each of this case’s taxation.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.