Incheon District Court 2018Guu5054 ( October 25, 2018)

Whether the instant tax invoice constitutes a false tax invoice

The tax invoice of this case is prepared retroactively after the lapse of the taxable period of value-added tax, which constitutes a tax invoice stating a part of the requisite entries in the main sentence differently from the fact.

Article 32 of the Value-Added Tax Act

Seoul High Court 2018Nu74084 Disposition Rejecting Value-Added Tax Correction

○○○○○

○ Head of tax office

Incheon District Court Decision 2018Guhap5054 Decided October 25, 2018

March 7, 2019

March 28, 2019

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.

The Defendant’s refusal to rectify the value-added tax amounting to KRW 202,727,273 for 2016, which was imposed on the Plaintiff on May 31, 2017, and the disposition of refusal to rectify the value-added tax amounting to KRW 21,818,182 for 2016 is revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this court's judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for deletion of "as prescribed by Article 75 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act" of 8-9 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it is accepted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.