Whether a tax invoice received from a purchaser at present is false or not.

It is insufficient to conclude that only the fact that an accusation was filed on the data alone is a tax invoice different from the fact that no real transaction is accompanied, and even if the business registration number of the head office, which is not the place of purchase, is written differently from the fact.

Article 16 of the Value-Added Tax Act: Tax amount paid

1. The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax for the first term of October 10, 2006 on the Plaintiff for the first term of 12,259,460 won, value-added tax for the second term of 2001, value-added tax for the second term of 16,779,770 won, value-added tax for the first term of 2002, value-added tax for the first term of 10,518,980 won, and the imposition of value-added tax for the second term of 2001 against the Plaintiff OO on November 7, 2006, each disposition of 13,689,120 won, value-added tax for the second term of 201, value-added tax for the first term of 11,679,250 won, shall be revoked.

2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

Cheong-gu Office

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiffs, as married couple, are the plaintiff OO-O's O-O's O-O's O-O's O-O's 'O', the plaintiff O-O's 'O's 'O-O's 'O's 'O-O' is a business operator who runs each gold product music retail business in the same commercial building 'O-O', 'O', 'O', 'OO', 'OOOO' (hereinafter 'OOO') received the purchase tax invoice (hereinafter 'the tax invoice in this case') as follows, from the output tax amount in each taxable period, after deducting the value-added tax amount under the tax invoice in this case from the output tax amount in each taxable period as the input tax amount, each value-added tax was reported and paid from 1st to 1st 2001 to 202.'

Taxation Period

Purchase

Value of supply (total value)

Amount of tax

Total Amount

1

MaximumO

1, 2001

4

56,981,000

5,698,100

62,679,100

2

201

16

81,475,000

8,147,500

89,622,500

3

1, 2002

15

53,423,00

5,342,300

58,765,300

Sub-committees

191,879,000

19,187,900

211,066,900

4

HanO

201

13

68,139,000

6,813,900

74,952,900

5

1, 2002

5

60,877,000

6,087,700

66,964,700

Sub-committees

129,016,000

12,901,600

141,917,600

C. The Defendant notified the head of the OOO of the taxation data that OOO issued a tax invoice without a real transaction. Considering that the instant tax invoice was issued without a real transaction and deducted the relevant input tax amount on October 10, 2006, the Defendant issued an increase or decrease of the value-added tax of 12,259,460 won (including additional tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) for the first term of 2001, value-added tax of 16,779,770 won for the second term of 201, and value-added tax of 10,518,980 won for the first term of 206, 2006, 13,689, 120 won for the second term of 201, and 16, 2002, 207, 2009, 207, 2000 won for each of the instant dispositions (hereinafter referred to as “each of each of the instant dispositions”).

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 7-1 through 8, Gap evidence 10-1, 2, 3, Gap evidence 11-1, 2, Eul evidence 1-1 through 32, Eul evidence 2-1 through 18, Eul evidence 3-1, 2, 3, 4-1, 4-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The assertion

(1) The plaintiffs' assertion

Although the plaintiffs purchased the tax invoice corresponding to the tax invoice of this case from OOO and deposited all of the proceeds into the account of OOOOO, the plaintiffs merely concluded that the plaintiffs received the tax invoice of this case without real transactions on the grounds that it is a company suspected of being accused of material facts, without undergoing specific investigation or confirmation with the plaintiffs. Each disposition of this case by the defendant is unlawful.

(2) The defendant's assertion

(A) The instant tax invoice is a tax invoice processed without an actual transaction.

(B) Even if a domestic or actual transaction fact is recognized, the plaintiffs purchase a workplace located in OO-dong O-dong, O-O-O building, but the tax invoice of this case contains the business registration number of the workplace located in O-O-O. Thus, the tax invoice of this case is a tax invoice stating differently from the fact that the "business registration number of the entity that supplies", which is a requisite entry, is the necessary entry.

(C) Therefore, each of the dispositions in this case, which the Plaintiffs did not deduct the input tax amount reported on the basis of the false tax invoice, is lawful.

(b) Related statutes;

Value-Added Tax Act

Article 16 (Tax Invoice)

(1) Where an entrepreneur registered as a taxpayer supplies goods or services, he/she shall deliver an invoice stating the following matters (hereinafter referred to as "tax invoice") to the person who receives the supply, as prescribed by Presidential Decree, at the time provided for in Article 9 (referring to the time prescribed otherwise by Presidential Decree, if any). In such cases, after issuing a tax invoice, a tax invoice may be modified as prescribed by Presidential Decree, in cases where any ground prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as error or correction, arises

1. Registration number, name or denomination of the businessman who provides;

2. Registration number of the person who receives;

3. Supply value and value-added tax;

4. Date of preparation.

5. Matters prescribed by Presidential Decree, other than those under subparagraphs 1 through 4.

Article 17 (Payable Tax 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 following input tax amounts shall not be deducted from the output tax amount:

1. An input tax amount in case where the list of the total tax invoice by customer is not submitted under Article 20 (1) and (2), or the input tax amount on the portion not entered or entered differently from the fact, in case where the whole or part of the registration numbers or supply values by transaction parties in the submitted list of the total tax invoice by customer is not entered or entered differently from the fact, except in such case as prescribed by

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

(hereinafter referred to as "not more than 50

C. Determination

(1) Whether it is a false tax invoice without an actual transaction

The burden of proving whether there was a transaction, such as the supply of goods or services, which is a taxation requirement under the Value-Added Tax Act, or the value of supply, which is a tax base, is, in principle, at the tax authority (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Nu2431, Sept. 22, 1992): Provided, that only where the facts alleged in light of the empirical rule in the specific litigation process are revealed, the other party can only be able to prove the circumstances in which the pertinent facts in question cannot be eligible for the application of the empirical rule (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Du6392, Nov. 13,

(5) According to the facts and circumstances that each of the above O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-U-O-O-O-U-O-O-owned's purchase of the above-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-owned's purchase of the above-O-O-O-O-O-owned's purchase of the above-O-O-O-O-O-O-owned's purchase of the non-indicted--O-O-O-O-O-owned's purchase of the non-indicted--O-O-O-U-owned's purchase of the above-O-O-U-owned's purchase of the non-indicted- of the above evidence and the facts that the plaintiffs were informed of the non-O-O-O-O-owned's purchase of the non-O- of the above-O-O-O- of the non-indicted's purchase of the non-O-O-O-O-state-owned materials.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the plaintiffs' claims are reasonable, all of them shall be accepted, and it is decided as per Disposition.