logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2014. 09. 05. 선고 2014두7954 판결
(심리불속행)비철금속 공급자가 허위로 기재된 사실과 다른 세금계산서를 수취함에 있어 원고의 선의ㆍ무과실을 인정할 수 없음[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Daejeon High Court (Cheongju) 2013Nu193, 23 April 2014)

Title

(C) If a non-ferrous metal supplier receives a false tax invoice different from the facts entered falsely, the Plaintiff’s good faith and without fault may not be recognized.

Summary

(1) The summary of the instant tax invoice falls under a tax invoice which is different from the fact by a non-ferrous metal supplier; the Plaintiff engaged in the non-ferrous metal industry for several years; the Plaintiff has an exceptional aspect compared to the ordinary distribution structure; and the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have paid due attention to the transaction process in light of the possibility of ex post facto manipulation of measurement certificates and specifications of transaction.

Cases

2014du7954 Disposition to revoke the imposition of value-added tax.

Plaintiff-Appellant

KimA

Defendant-Appellee

Head of Chungcheong Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Daejeon High Court (Cheongju) Decision 2013Nu193 Decided April 23, 2014

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

Reasons

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the appellant’s grounds of appeal are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided

arrow