District Court-2017-Gu Partnership-12204 ( October 25, 2018)

The instant tax invoice constitutes a false tax invoice.

(1) The instant tax invoice constitutes a false tax invoice, and the Plaintiff’s act constitutes an intentional act for the purpose of tax evasion, and thus, the exclusion period for imposition of ten years should apply.

The contents of the judgment are the same as attachment.

Article 26-2 of the National Tax Basic Act

2018Nu72262 Disposition of revocation of imposition of value-added tax, etc.

BAA

a) the Director of the Tax Office

Suwon District Court Decision 2017Guhap12204 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 court shall be revoked. The defendant's imposition of the first half-year value-added tax on December 1, 2015 on the plaintiff on December 1, 2015 on the imposition of the imposition of the first half-year value-added taxx,xx,xxx (including additional tax), each of the value-added tax and global income tax listed in the attached Table 1 list ("the first half notice") that exceeds the amount of the legitimate tax column shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, since it is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except to dismiss or add the corresponding parts of the judgment of the court of first instance, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Parts to be removed or added

6-7 to 8 pages "(No. 1-2)" are "(No. 1-2)".

6. 6. 18. The following shall be added:

5. Since the method of determining the amount of value-added tax and income tax is the method of tax return, if a taxpayer fails to file a tax return while concealing the receipt and disbursement of money by using a borrowed account as well as making transactions without receiving and issuing a tax invoice as above, it is sufficient to deem that the tax authority’s imposition and collection of taxes are impossible or considerably difficult (it does not change even if considering the circumstances emphasizing the Plaintiff by means of account transfer, i.e., receipt of sales proceeds by account transfer rather than the current bidding transaction, and the financial transaction inquiry council inquiries about all of his/her families when conducting a tax investigation with respect to an ordinary entrepreneur, and the disposition of this case is also identified through a financial inquiry for his/her spouse account).

2. Conclusion

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