Seoul Administrative Court-2014-Gu 64773 ( October 15, 2015)

Review-department -2013-0058 (Law No. 13, 2014.05)

Whether a false tax invoice is false

The portion of the processed tax amount of this case is that a false tax invoice is issued without actual supply of goods.

Article 16 of the Value-Added Tax Act

2015Nu4586 The revocation of the disposition to impose value-added tax

AA and 2

BB Director of the Tax Office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2014Guhap64773 decided May 15, 2015

February 25, 2016

March 17, 2016

1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The defendant revoked the disposition of imposition of the second period0,00,000 won for the year 200,000,000 for the year 2006 to Plaintiff AA, and the first period of year 2007,00,0000 for the year 207,00,000,000 for the year 20,008,000,000 for the year 20,000,000,000 for the year 2, 200,00,000,000 for the year 2, 200,000,000 for the year 2, 200,000,000 for the plaintiff GG and H for the year 200,000 for the year 209,000 for the year 20,000 for each year 20,000 for each year 200.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

This court's reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the first instance court's judgment, except for changing some contents and adding some contents as follows. Thus, this court's reasoning is cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Parts to be modified.

○ The fifth 12-15 of the judgment of the first instance court is modified as follows.

③ “The details of purchase and sale” submitted by the Plaintiffs (Evidence A 2-1, 2-2) are merely that the amount of documentary evidence presented to the effect that the purchase and sale amount and the amount of documentary evidence related thereto are significantly different, and that most of the documentary evidence presented to the effect that the purchase and sale amount were paid for by the purchaser was paid in full.

It is difficult to believe.

Parts to be added

○ In Part 6, the following shall be added to the 13th sentence of the first instance court:

7)CC stated to the effect that 95% of the purchase amount from 2006 to 2010 is related to butane gas is 2% of the total amount related to electric power equipment, and DDR witness of the first instance court also dealt with carbon gas in a large scale since 1999, and that the company that purchases but sells but sells the butane gas in the form of non-data instead of preparing a tax invoice, and that it has prepared a tax invoice as if it was supplied without any material to make the sales data necessary for the value-added tax return. 8 The Plaintiffs asserted that the Plaintiff was not a product treated by the Plaintiffs, but only a small amount of money for some customers. However, the video as provided by subparagraph 4 is insufficient to acknowledge this, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' appeal is without merit, and all of the appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

shall be ruled.