beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On February 5, 2009, the Plaintiff registered the business by entering the trade name “B”, “B”, “Asan City outside D”, “ado retail”, and “a gas station” into the place of business.
From around that time, the Plaintiff operated “B” at the same place (hereinafter “instant gas station”) and closed the business on April 20, 2010.
B. The Plaintiff received a tax invoice for the total value of KRW 1,226,34,00, the total value of supply from the SPS Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “SP”) in the first and second taxable periods of the value-added tax in the first and second taxable periods of the Value-Added Tax, which is 208,254,545,545, and the total value of supply from the SPS Seoul Seoul Metropolitan Finance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “SP”) in the sum of the supply value of KRW 591,54,00,00, and reported and paid each value-added tax for the first and second taxable years of the year 2009 by deducting the input tax amount from the output tax amount.
C. From February 25, 2010 to March 25, 2010, as a result of the tax investigation into the gas station in the instant case, it was revealed that Hyundai Nungs and EP energy were so-called “data market,” and that each tax invoice that the Plaintiff received from them were different from the fact, and thus, the input tax amount was deducted on June 24, 2010, and the Plaintiff was corrected and notified respectively to the Plaintiff on June 24, 2010, as the value-added tax amounting to 181,359,69,690, and value-added tax amounting to 105,189,570, respectively.
(hereinafter referred to as “instant Disposition Nos. 1 and 2”) D.
The Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the instant disposition Nos. 1 and 2 and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on September 6, 2010, but was dismissed on December 23, 2010.
E. The Plaintiff asserts that “each tax invoice received from the On-site and EP energy is not a false tax invoice, but a false tax invoice is not a false one, and there is a justifiable ground for not knowing such a situation.”