The case holding that even though the registration number and name of the lessor who is not the operator was entered in the column of the tax invoice that the lessee and operator of the gas station received the oil from the oil refining company (supplier), the input tax amount may be deducted without regard to the fact that the transaction of the operator's oil can be easily confirmed based on other information.

The case holding that even though the registration number and name of the lessor who is not the operator was entered in the column of the tax invoice that the lessee and operator of the gas station received the oil from the oil refining company (supplier), the input tax amount may be deducted without regard to other tax invoice where the transaction of the operator's oil can be easily confirmed based on other information.

Articles 16(1), 17(1) and (2)1-2 of the Value-Added Tax Act, Article 60(2)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellant-appellee

Plaintiff

Daejeon Head of the District Tax Office

Daejeon High Court Decision 2000Nu2462 delivered on September 28, 2001

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to Article 17(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act, the amount of value-added tax payable by an entrepreneur shall be the amount determined by deducting the input tax amount from the output tax amount. Under the main sentence of Article 17(2)1-2 of the Value-Added Tax Act, where the whole or part of the requisite entry items in a tax invoice are not entered or entered differently from the fact under the main sentence of Article 17(2)1-2 of the same Act, the input tax amount shall not be deducted from the output tax amount. However, under the proviso of the same Article and Article 60(2)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, where some of the requisite entry items in a tax invoice delivered under Article 16(1) of the Act were erroneously entered, but the transaction is confirmed by

According to the facts duly established by the court below and the record, the name and registration number of the business operator are indicated as the "private teaching institute" for the non-party school foundation (hereinafter "non-party corporation") which is not the plaintiff. However, the above tax invoice was delivered to the non-party corporation after being supplied oil from the non-party corporation to the non-party corporation (hereinafter "non-party corporation") while operating the non-party corporation by leasing the "non-party corporation oil station", and the plaintiff did not settle the debt relationship between the non-party corporation and the non-party corporation and was not submitted the plaintiff's business registration certificate, and it was merely stated in the registration number and name of the non-party corporation which was the previous operator of the non-party corporation, and the trade name, address, etc. of the business place are stated as the plaintiff as the actual operator of the non-party corporation. However, the above tax invoice of this case constitutes the non-party corporation's non-party corporation's non-party corporation's non-party 2 (the non-party corporation's tax invoice of this case).

The decision of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to tax invoices and input tax deduction as otherwise alleged in the ground

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Byun Jae-chul (Presiding Justice)