Incheon District Court 2012Guhap4924 (23 May 2013)

early 2012 Middle 1675 (Law No. 13, 2012)

The actual supplier and the supplier under the tax invoice constitute a different tax invoice from the actual supplier

The instant tax invoice constitutes a different tax invoice from the actual supplier and the supplier on the tax invoice, and it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff constitutes a transaction party with good faith and negligence without knowledge of the actual supplier’s name.

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

2013Nu16496. Revocation of imposition of value-added tax, etc.

Park AA

the director of the tax office of Western

Incheon District Court Decision 2012Guhap4924 Decided May 23, 2013

November 19, 2013

December 20, 2013

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

On December 1, 2011, the Defendant revoked each imposition of the first value-added tax for the Plaintiff, the second value-added tax for the year 2009, the second value-added tax for the year 2009, the first value-added tax for the year 2010, the OOOO, the first global income tax for the year 2009, the OOOO, and the second global income tax for the year 2010, respectively.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

"The court's explanation of this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of 68-1 and 2 of the evidence No. 68-2 of the evidence No. 13 of the judgment of the court of first instance and 'YB' testimony of the witness No. 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance," and the conclusion is as follows.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking the revocation of each disposition of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just and it is dismissed as the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is so decided as per Disposition.