Seoul Administrative Court 2009Guhap34266 ( October 15, 2010)

Seocho 209west 1839 (209.03)

No person may assert the excess of the sales he/she has voluntarily reported in the adjustment of increase due to the non-deduction of input tax amount.

If a taxpayer voluntarily reports such sales to him/her, it is reasonable to deem that such sales actually existed, and even if there was no domestic sales, the portion reported by a taxpayer as sales is finalized as it is, and thus, it cannot be asserted that the increase or decrease due to the non-deduction of input tax amount cannot be claimed.

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. The imposition of value-added tax by the defendant against the plaintiffs as shown in the attached Form shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for adding new judgments on the light of the plaintiffs' new arguments at the court of first instance, and therefore, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is accepted by Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

▣ 제1심 판결문 4쪽 8째줄 다음에 아래 부분을 추가한다.

Any assertion of abuse of the power of attorney by the certified tax accountant of Plaintiff AA.

Since Plaintiff LA’s U.S. Accounting Office reported false sales and purchase against Plaintiff LA’s will, it constitutes abuse of the right of representation. The Defendant asserted that Plaintiff LA’s sales and purchase of Han-gu’s Han-gu’s Han-gu’s Han-si’s Han-si’s Han-si’s Han-si’s Han-si’s Han-si’s sales and purchase were false, and that the report of this case’s value-added tax was invalid.

(4) The Plaintiff’s assertion related to the Plaintiff’s revised report

The plaintiff LAA asserts that since the negligence of the tax office or the tax office that received a revised report was not received due to the defendant's solicitation, it should not be disposed of differently from the other merchants who filed the revised report.

(5) Plaintiff BB’s assertion on the closure of business

Plaintiff BB closed down the store called “CC,” and did not incur sales or purchase, and accordingly, the respective dispositions of this case asserted that they are the above-mentioned laws.”

▣ 제1심 판결문 6쪽 9째줄 다음에 아래 부분을 추가한다.

Determination as to the assertion of abuse of the power of attorney by the tax accountant of Plaintiff BarA

The tax agent's duty is to act on behalf of the taxpayer for a return, application, claim, etc. on tax (Article 2 of the Certified Tax Accountant Act), and the effect of the act on behalf of the tax agent belongs to the principal unless there are special circumstances, and the above plaintiff's assertion alone is insufficient to recognize that the tax office made the above false sale and purchase report against the plaintiff's intent. Since there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, the above assertion is without merit without need to examine it.

(4) Determination on the Plaintiff’s assertion related to the Plaintiff’s revised report

Since there is no evidence to prove that the revised return was not received due to the negligence of the tax office or the tax office requested by the tax office or the revised return, the above assertion is without merit without further review.

(5) Plaintiff BB’s assertion on the closure of business

The statement in Gap evidence No. 11 alone is insufficient to recognize that Plaintiff BB did not sell or purchase with respect to the above store by closing the store called "CC," and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and therefore, it is not reasonable to examine the above argument history further.

2. Conclusion

The plaintiffs' claims in this case are all dismissed due to the lack of reasonable grounds, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and all appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.