Jeonju District Court 201Guhap423 (No. 2011.20)

early 2010 Mine2940 ( November 04, 2010)

It is not recognized that it is a good faith and negligence as a gas station business operator.

(As with the judgment of the court of first instance), a tax invoice delivered to a gas station operator constitutes a tax invoice different from the fact, and the defendant's disposition of imposing input tax without deducting input tax amount is legitimate on the ground that the plaintiff is not deemed to have acted in good faith and without negligence.

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

(B)Revocation of revocation of the imposition of value-added tax 201Nu1004

XX

Head of the Military Tax Office

Jeonju District Court Decision 201Guhap423 Decided September 20, 2011

December 26, 2011

January 16, 2012

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 87,020,940 against the plaintiff on June 3, 2010 shall be revoked.

The court's reasoning for this case is as follows: (a) "in the case of direct purchase from staticly similar names, the temperature, etc. at the time of shipment is shown" in Section 2-3 of Section 5 of the first instance court's decision, but in the case of purchase from a wholesaler, the temperature, etc. at the time of shipment is not stated (see, e.g., No. 9-1, No. 2); (b) "in the case of purchase from a wholesaler, it is negligent in confirmation" in Section 19 of Section 7, and "in the case of purchase from a wholesaler, it is common to receive and deliver petroleum at the same time as a document with the burden of proving the goods supplied at the time of petroleum trade, as a document performing the function of the operator of the transported vehicle at the time of receiving the oil, the plaintiff added "in the form of abnormal trade, such as delivery by mail, etc. with the tax invoice 2-3 after the date of delivery; and (c) it is not sufficient to recognize that the plaintiff constitutes the plaintiff's negligence in good faith's name and negligence.

Therefore, the claim of this case shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.