beta
Text
The judgment below
The part against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to Busan High Court.
The plaintiff.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal are examined.
1. As to the Plaintiff’s grounds of appeal, the court shall determine whether the assertion of facts is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules on the basis of the ideology of social justice and equity by free evaluation of evidence, taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings and the result of examination of evidence. The fact that the judgment of the court below did not exceed the bounds of the free evaluation of
(2) Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Articles 202 and 432 of the Civil Procedure Act. Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court recognized that each of the instant tax invoices that the Plaintiff received from D constituted “illegal tax invoices” as different from the actual supplier on the relevant tax invoice, and determined that all of the instant tax imposition disposition on the instant tax invoice and the instant tax assessment disposition on the transaction between Nos. 1, 4, and 14 of the lower judgment are lawful.
The allegation in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing such fact-finding by the lower court, and is merely an error in the selection of evidence and the determination of the value of evidence belonging to the free trial of the lower court.
In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine, the relevant legal doctrine as indicated in the lower judgment, and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the supplier and supplier of the Value-Adde
The Supreme Court precedents cited in the grounds of final appeal are different from this case, and thus are inappropriate to be invoked in this case.
2. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal
A. (1) Article 76(5) of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 10423, Dec. 30, 2010) (hereinafter “instant legal provision”) (hereinafter “instant legal provision”) is the head of a tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment.