Jeju District Court 2015-Gu Partnership-5614 (No. 11, 2018)

The issue of whether the supplied duty-free oil has been actually distributed is not considered as a taxation requirement, and the management insolvency of the plaintiffs is recognized.

The issue of whether the supplied duty-free oil has been actually distributed is not considered as a taxation requirement, and the management insolvency of the plaintiffs is recognized.

2018Nu1543 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax, etc.

AAAAAA and six other persons.

BB Director of the Tax Office

Jeju District Court 2015Guhap5614

December 5, 2018

January 9, 2019

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. Each disposition of imposition of additional tax as stated in the separate sheet against the plaintiffs shall be revoked by the defendant.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's explanation on this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition as follows. Thus, this court's explanation is acceptable in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The addition;

It is reasonable to see that the judgment of the first instance court falls under the category 14th 13th ..... .. .. ... ... .... ... ..... .......... ...................

The judgment of the court of first instance is difficult to see the third party at the bottom of the 17th judgment (if the plaintiff is issued to the fishermen who depart from the Republic of Korea, it is difficult to see that the fishermen's power of attorney has been submitted, and thus, the disposition imposing additional tax corresponding to the part of the disposition of this case should be revoked illegally. However, even in this case, as seen earlier, it is difficult to see that the plaintiffs were submitted documents to confirm the lawful delegation relationship or to confirm the actual operation of the mandator, and therefore, it is difficult to see that the plaintiffs were submitted with documents to confirm the legitimate delegation relationship or to confirm the actual operation of the delegating).

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims shall be dismissed because they are without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and all of the plaintiffs' appeals are dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.