Seoul High Court 2009Nu21910 ( October 06, 2009)

Supreme Court Decision 2008Du17639 (Law No. 23, 2009)

It shall not be deemed a nominal transaction solely on the ground that there is a bomb in the gold bullion transaction phase.

Most of the entire transactions until gold bullion is imported and exported, and it is difficult to readily conclude that the nominal transactions are not the supply of goods subject to taxation solely on the basis of the fact that there is a wide carbon company involved in the tax-free business at the middle stage.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

쇠지지 지지은은 3000 아은은은은은 3000 아은은은은은은은은은 3000 아은이 3000 아은은이 이 3000 아아은은은 3000 개이 3000209Du18844

지지300 쇠지지 3000 지지지 3000 AAAra Roman International

쇠지지300 쇠지지지지 3000 지지지지 3000 지지지지지지 3000B Head of tax office

44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 44 444 44

Article 300 u u3000 u300 n u3000 n u3000 Seoul High Court Decision 2009Nu21910 decided October 6, 2009

쇠은은 이 개은은은 3000 개은은은 3000 개은은은은은 3000 이 이 이 3000 개은이 13, 1300

44 44 44 44 44 45 44 444 64 44

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

쇠鹬 쇠鹬 3000 쇠鹬 3000

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Where an entrepreneur, who is liable to pay value-added tax, delivers or transfers goods due to contractual or legal grounds, it becomes subject to value-added tax, barring any special provision stipulating that the value-added tax shall be exempted or imposed. Therefore, if an entrepreneur independently supplies goods for business purposes, taxation requirements are satisfied. Meanwhile, even if an entrepreneur, who is supplied goods by such an entrepreneur, expects the entrepreneur to deduct the relevant input tax amount from his/her total output tax amount, and enters the transaction amount in the tax invoice separately from the value of supply and the value-added tax, if the entrepreneur entered the relevant transaction amount in the tax invoice separately from the value of supply and the value-added tax in the tax invoice, then the transaction should be deemed as having been collected separately from the value of supply (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Da62821, Feb. 22, 200; 2004Da6065, May 27, 2005).

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below found that the plaintiff purchased gold bullion equivalent to 15,171,857,690 won in total from 10 business operators, includingCC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the supplier of this case") from December 22, 2003 to September 17, 2004, and received the gold bullion (hereinafter referred to as "the gold bullion of this case") and paid the price in full (hereinafter referred to as "the transaction of this case"), and delivered 38 copies of the tax invoice for this case (hereinafter referred to as "tax invoice of this case") from the supplier of this case from the supplier of this case to export the gold bullion within a short period of time, and there was no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the supply of gold bullion tax invoice of this case and the amount of value-added tax can be viewed as a trade in violation of the rules of evidence and there was no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the facts alleged in the ground of appeal.

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.