Whether it is a zero-rate sale under a false purchase approval (gold)

Value-added tax shall be levied by excluding the application of zero tax rates in accordance with a letter of approval for purchase with defects in the zero tax rate sales.

Tax amount paid under Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Each disposition of imposition of value-added tax for the first period of 2002 against the Plaintiff on October 10, 2005 by the Defendant is revoked, respectively.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a legal entity established on December 14, 2001 and from January 2002, which had been engaged in the business of importing gold bullion (referring to gold in the state of raw materials, such as gold bullion, gold bullion, and dud, with a loss of at least 95/100 in this case) from Japan and Hoju as follows, and supplying it to exporters, processing companies, exporters, etc.

Table 1 of the record of sales in the year 2002

(2) An incorporated entity;

Ministry of Strategy and Finance

Number of Goods

Amount of each entry;

Amount of each withdrawal;

Japan ○○

790 kilograms

9,972,263,232 won

Australia ○○

2,250 kilograms

28,207,90,718

( Note)OOO

1,730 kilograms

2,353,740,000 won

(m)○○ person;

950 kilograms

12,332,200,000 won

(m)○○ commercial

20 kilograms

2,663,700,000

(m)○○○

160 kilograms

2,340,500,000 won

Consolidateds

38,180,163,950 won

39,690,140,000 won

B. After paying customs duties and value-added tax at the time of the import of gold bullion, the Plaintiff issued sales tax invoices by applying the zero-rate tax rate under the Value-Added Tax Act through a certificate of purchase of raw materials for foreign exchange received from the head of a foreign exchange bank, and a certificate of receipt of goods, and issued a certificate of tax payment for the customs duties already paid after filing a value-added tax return to the seller. As for the customs duties to be refunded, the Plaintiff issued a certificate of tax payment for basic raw materials (division certificate) to the seller.

C. On October 10, 2005, the Defendant issued a false tax invoice in collusion with the Plaintiff’s seller for the purpose of evading taxes, and issued a false tax invoice to the Plaintiff for the purpose of disguised zero-rate sales, and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 1,870,650,70 for the first term portion of value-added tax in the year 2002, and KRW 3,289,097,50 for the second term portion of value-added tax in the year 2002 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

D. The plaintiff was dissatisfied with the disposition of this case and filed an appeal with the National Tax Tribunal on November 23, 2005 as the National Tax Tribunal No. 2006No1017, but the National Tax Tribunal dismissed the plaintiff's appeal on May 25, 2006.

Each entry (including each number) in Gap 1,2,11, and Eul 1

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff actually traded the same contents as the tax invoice of this case, and did not participate in the solicitation for unfair refund of value-added tax. The Plaintiff’s conspiracy with a trader to unlawfully refund value-added tax is merely the Defendant’s trend without any evidence. The Plaintiff did not intend to evade taxes jointly with gold bullion companies and did not know that the Plaintiff did not engage in the other company’s act. Accordingly, the Defendant’s disposition of this case was unlawful, based on the premise that the instant tax invoice was a false tax invoice or the Plaintiff knew or could have known of it.

B. Relevant statutes

/ Value-Added Tax Act

Article 11 Application of the Age Tax Rates

(1) The tax rates of the Cabinet shall apply to the supply of goods or services in the following subparagraphs:

1. Exported goods;

Article 17 Tax Payment Amount

(1) The amount of value-added taxes payable by an entrepreneur (hereinafter referred to as the “paid tax amount”) shall be the amount computed by deducting the tax amount under the following subparagraphs (hereinafter referred to as the “purchase tax amount”) from the tax amount on the goods and services supplied by him (hereinafter referred to as the “sales tax amount”): Provided, That where an input tax amount exceeds the output tax amount, it shall be a refundable tax amount (hereinafter

1. The tax amount for the supply of goods or services used or to be used for his own business;

2. The tax amount for the import of goods used or to be used for his own business; and

(2) The following input taxes shall not be deducted from the output tax amount:

1-2. An input tax amount, in case where the tax invoice as provided in Article 16 (1) and (3) is not delivered, or the whole or part of the matters to be entered under Article 16 (1) 1 through 4 (hereinafter referred to as a "necessary entry item") is not entered or entered differently from the fact on the delivered tax invoice: Provided, That the input tax amount in such case as prescribed by the Presidential Decree shall

Article 21. Determination and correction

(1) The head of a district tax office having jurisdiction over a place of business, the Commissioner of the competent Regional Tax Office or the Commissioner of the National Tax Service shall determine or correct the tax base of value-added tax or tax amount

2. Where there are any mistakes or omissions in details of the final tax return;

3. Where the list of the total tax invoice by buyer or the total tax invoice by buyer is not submitted in the final tax return, or all or part of the submitted list of the total tax invoice by buyer is not entered or

] Gu Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 19215 of Feb. 9, 2006)

Article 24 Scope of Exportation

(1) Exports under Article 11 (1) 1 of the Act shall be as follows:

1. Shipping domestic goods (including the fishery products collected by Korean vessels) from a foreign country;

(2) Goods exported under Article 11 (1) 1 of the Act shall be deemed to include the following goods:

1. Goods supplied by an entrepreneur through a local letter of credit or written confirmation of purchase as prescribed by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy: Provided, That gold bullion supplied under a written confirmation of purchase

【The former Enforcement Rule of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Finance and Economy No. 499 on March 17, 2006)

Article 9-2 Scope of Local Letter of Credit, etc.

(2) The term "purchase confirmations provided for in Article 24 (2) 1 of the Decree and Article 26 (1) 2-2 of the Decree means confirmations issued by the head of a foreign exchange bank under Articles 38-2 and 116 (14) of the Enforcement Decree of the Foreign Trade Act within 20 days after the end of the taxable period to which the time of supply for goods or services belongs, corresponding to a local letter of credit referred to in paragraph (1) and on which the documents, such as the export letters of credit

x. Basic Value-Added Tax Act

11-24-9 Goods supplied under a local letter of credit or letter of approval for purchase.

Tax rates of zero shall apply to goods supplied under a local letter of credit or a purchase approval as provided for in the Foreign Trade Act, regardless of whether such goods are used for export after they are supplied (amended by Presidential Decree No. 1583, Oct. 1, 1998).

/ former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 7577 of July 13, 2005)

Article 106 (Special Taxation of Value-Added Tax on Gold Prohibitions

(1) The value-added tax shall be exempted until June 30, 2005 pursuant to the classification under paragraph (3) for the supply of gold bullion falling under any of the following subparagraphs (hereafter referred to as "tax-free gold bullion" in this Article), which is bullion equipped with the form, net altitude, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree (hereafter referred to as "gold bullion" in this

1. Gold bullion supplied by the wholesalers and refiners of gold bullion prescribed by the Presidential Decree (hereafter in this Article, referred to as the "gold bullion wholesalers, etc.") to the gold craftsmen, etc. prescribed by the Presidential Decree (hereafter in this Article, referred to as the "gold craftsmen, etc.") after receiving tax-free recommendation from a person prescribed by the Presidential Decree (hereafter in this Article, referred to

2. Gold bullion supplied or redeemed by the gold bullion wholesalers, etc. and financial institutions prescribed by the Presidential Decree (hereafter in this Article, referred to as "financial institutions") to the financial institutions recommended for tax-free gold bullion trading;

3. Gold metals supplied under the futures trading under the Futures Trading Act: Provided, That the same shall not apply to the case where any person other than the gold craftsmen, etc. (including the financial institutions) takes over the actual objects of

(2) The value-added tax shall be exempted until June 30, 2005 on the gold bullion imported by the gold craftsmen, etc. and financial institutions after receiving a tax-free import recommendation from the persons prescribed by the Presidential Decree (hereafter referred to as "the head of the tax

(3) Special cases under the Value-Added Tax Act shall apply to the tax-free gold metals under paragraph (1) pursuant to any of the following subparagraphs:

1. Where a financial institution supplies tax-free gold metals, Article 12 of the Value-Added Tax Act shall apply;

2. Where any entrepreneur other than financial institutions supplies the tax-free gold bullion, the relevant entrepreneur shall be deemed the value-added tax taxable entrepreneur and subject to the application of the Value-Added Tax Act. In this case, the value-added tax amount borne at the time of purchasing the relevant gold bullion in connection with the supply of the tax-free gold bullion shall not be deemed the input tax amount eligible for the deduction under Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act, and the tax-free gold bullion gold metals manufactured and supplied by the gold bullion refiner and the value-added tax amount borne by the relevant entrepreneur in connection with the purchase

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) In 1983, ○○○○, a metal refining company, entered the Plaintiff’s representative director, and was engaged in overseas business and futures business until he retires in 195, and was in charge of precious metal business from 1992 to 1995. This ○○ established the Plaintiff corporation by introducing △△△○, a corporation with which he had been well aware of from that date, to 1992.

(2) The OV01 ○○○, which is the basic document of the purchase approval, submitted by the △△△ corporation between January 17, 2002 and January 31, 2002, is based on the export contract with the Hong Kong W○○ Co., Ltd., but the above documents are false purchase approval.

(3) All the purchasing places of gold bullion sold by the Plaintiff are materials, and all the purchasing places of gold bullion purchased from the said purchasing places were accused of tax evasion by all the competent tax offices.

(4) For gold bullion, various changes, including value-added tax evasion, etc., are crossing in order to address the price of gold bullion, the domestic market price of which is higher than the international market price, accounts for 66% of the domestic circulation, and accordingly, the price of gold bullion, which has been regularly imported, takes place.

(5) The Plaintiff suspended the import of gold bullion after May 2004 (from April 1, 2005, the obligation to provide security for tax payment to the wholesalers of tax-free gold bullion under Article 106-3 (11) of the Tax Special Taxation Restriction Act was enforced).

(6) In the event that the gold bullion import is not enough now, this ○○○ requested a loan to the △△△△ corporation, and the lending title holder is this △△, ○○, ○○, ○○, and △△, △△, etc., and this △△, △△, and this △△, △△, etc., is all the relatives of △△,

(7) In the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2006 Gohap 1073, 1073, 1096, and 1141 Decided January 12, 2007, "the defendant Han-○, Kim○, and Kang-○" is established or taken over by the company, etc. trading gold bullion directly or by using the company, etc. that trades gold bullion, or by using the relative, relative, and a person who has no economic ability, etc., and formed a gold bullion trader by posting the gold bullion at each stage, such as import, domestic distribution, export, etc., and then forming a gold bullion trader.

First, in the case where gold bullion is imported and sold in a successive manner at the import stage, an importer or a seller thereafter can get refund of customs duties paid at the time of import by allowing each purchaser to obtain a certificate of division of import declaration (hereinafter referred to as "certificate of division") under Article 9(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Refund of Customs Duties, etc. Levied on Raw Materials for Export, Article 10(2) and (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 4-3-1 of the Public Notice on the Handling of Customs Duties, etc. Levied on Raw Materials for Export, etc., but the above certificate of division is written in detail. However, since the contents of the certificate are input through the Korea Customs Service-related computer system, the detailed flow of the transaction can be grasped rapidly and accurately, so that the certificate of division is not normally issued to the last transferee, thereby avoiding the evasion of value-added taxes by the tax authority by preventing the taxpayer from being issued to the last transferee.

Second, prior to June 30, 2003, an export approval letter was issued illegally using a forged export contract with a person with no economic capacity. After July 1, 2003, an import company which has obtained approval of the qualifications for the trade of gold bullion and actually controls the defendant with zero-rate or zero-rate purchase contract or a pre-stage purchase company using the qualifications for the trade of gold bullion, and thus, it is impossible to pay the value-added tax in reality by repeatedly purchasing gold bullion at a price lower than the purchase price and supplying gold bullion at a price lower than the purchase price. On the other hand, it is impossible to pay the value-added tax from the beginning without reporting the tax base and tax amount under the Value-Added Tax Act, or even if it is reported, it is difficult to directly or indirectly withdraw the balance of the tax amount collected for the trade to the company's account and then make it difficult for the other party to directly or indirectly purchase the gold bullion, and then, it is difficult for the other party to the tax investigation to directly or indirectly withhold the sales amount of gold bullion in the domestic market.

Finally, at the export stage, exporters can finally realize profits from the evasion of value-added tax only after two gold bullion exporters have evaded value-added tax by such unlawful means as above by a bombing company. Thus, exporters would purchase and export gold bullion over which immediately preceding value-added tax has been evaded by a bombing company through the above bombing company operated by the defendant, etc., but such trade is the most lawful purchase and export by the above bombing company. However, the defendant et al. is determined in advance for the transaction of gold bullion between the bombing company and the exporting company, and thus the actual owner of the income, profit, calculation, or profit of the transaction is not the defendant et al., and thus the exporter is not the exporter, and thus the exporter is not the exporter, thus the tax invoice prepared in the process of purchasing the exported goods is different from the fact. In this case, even though the exporter could not receive a refund of value-added tax by purchasing the exported goods, the exporter would obtain criminal profits by unfairly purchasing the value-added tax.

In collusion with the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Dong-gu, Dong-won, etc. in a successive manner, found the Defendants guilty of the facts constituting the crime that the imported company, including (a) the (b) the (b) the (c) the (b) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (d) the (c) the (c) the (d) the (c) the (c) the (c) the (d) the (

Each entry (including each number) in subparagraphs 1 through 13, subparagraphs 1 and 27, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

D. Determination

(1) Unless there are special circumstances such as: (a) whether gold bullion supplied by a supplier of gold bullion is actually exported to a buyer may not affect the seller’s application of zero-rate tax rate; and (b) the fact that there is a defect in the process of issuing a purchase approval does not necessarily mean that the purchase approval issued by the head of a foreign exchange bank is insufficient; and (c) the supplier was aware that there is a defect in issuing a purchase approval, the supply of goods made under the said purchase approval may not be immediately excluded from the supply of goods subject to zero-rate tax rate under the Value-Added Tax Act only on the ground of such defect in the process of issuing the purchase approval (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Du13

(2) However, in addition to the above facts, in light of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s sales of the instant gold bullion sold at zero tax rate but within a short time at the domestic market; (b) the transaction type of the instant gold bullion including the Plaintiff’s sales of most of the gold bullion on the same day; (c) the Plaintiff’s sales of the gold bullion do not seem to have been normal transaction; and (d) the Plaintiff appears to have performed the role of importing company to evade value-added tax pursuant to the gold bullion transaction; (c) the Plaintiff was convicted of having committed an act of evading value-added tax in collusion with the Do governor, Do governor, and Cho Young-gu, Seoul; (d) the Plaintiff was aware of the fact that the Plaintiff was used as the purchasing company; and (d) the Plaintiff’s sales offices were aware of the violation of the Procedure for Punishment of Tax Offenses Act; and (e) the Plaintiff’s purchase price of the gold bullion with the domestic market price higher than the international market price for gold bullion trading; and (e) the Plaintiff did not make any false confirmation of the import price of the instant gold bullion trading.

(3) Therefore, the instant disposition is lawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.