beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a business operator who engages in the construction and interior decoration business under the trade name of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Seoul) and 501 (C).
B. On May 20, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Public Procurement Service for purchase of procurement commodities (hereinafter “instant procurement contract”). On May 25, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for purchase of procurement commodities with Nonparty E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) with the price of KRW 170 million for supply under the said supply contract, and the delivery period of KRW 170 million for delivery (hereinafter “instant supply contract”). In concluding the said contract, a special agreement was added to the effect that “in the event of a breach of the contract, the Plaintiff compensates twice the down payment (50 million won)” (hereinafter “the down payment”).
C. The Plaintiff supplied human well-known from E to the Public Procurement Service (hereinafter “the above human well-known”) and paid KRW 165,000,000 (including value-added tax) discounted from the above KRW 170,000 to KRW 5 million as the price for the goods under the instant supply contract.
E reported the output tax amount of value-added tax for 154,545,45 won in total under the supply contract of this case at the first and second stages of 2005. The Plaintiff received a tax invoice for 154,545,455 won in the first and second period of 2005 and filed a value-added tax return after deducting the input tax amount of 15,454,545 won.
E. On August 26, 2005, the Public Procurement Service rendered a decision that the Plaintiff supplied from E is a man-made who does not meet the requirements for specifications under the above contract for purchase of the procurement commodities, and rendered a decision that the Plaintiff would cancel the instant procurement contract, and imposed sanctions against unjust enterprisers for six months.
F. On July 3, 2007, the Plaintiff provisionally attached the claims against the third obligor E, and this was done.