early 208west0292 (2008.05)

The tax base finalized by the report shall not be contested in the disposition of increase or correction.

Although it is argued that the final tax base should be deducted from the tax base due to the processing transaction, it can not be asserted in the increased or decreased disposition.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax for the first term of October 11, 2007 against the Plaintiff on 5,379,040 won, value-added tax for the second term of 2001 on 6,619,640 won, value-added tax for the first term of 2002 on 5,818,370 won, value-added tax for the second term of 2002 on 5,689,610 won, value-added tax for the first term of 203 on 4,959,510 won, value-added tax for the second term of 203 on 206,59,590 won, value-added tax for the first term of 204 on 1, 204 on 5,192,610 won, value-added tax for the second term of 204, value-added tax for 4,540, value-added tax for the second term of 2040, 374,205 won for 201.

1. Circumstances of the disposition;

(a) The plaintiff: The plaintiff is engaged in the wholesale and retail business of clothing with the trade name of 46 ○○ case No. 812, Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, Maumbro 46

(b) Results of the Seoul Regional Tax Office’s criminal investigation

(1) The investigation period: January 16, 2007 - April 19, 2007

(2) Details of detection

(가) ☆☆세무회계사무소(원고를 비롯한 남대문 상가 약 1,223개 업체의 세무신고 및 기장 대리)의 실질적 운영자 양★★은 위 1,2237~ 업체에 대한 부가가치세 신고를 하면서 기장업체의 부가가치세 매출과세표준과 매입세액 및 납부세액을 일정하게 맞추기 위하여 실지거래 없이 상호합의하에 매출ㆍ매입세금계산서를 주고받는 교차거래를 하였음.

(B) Issuance of tax invoices equivalent to KRW 219,849,00,000 in total of supply values by adjusting the sales tax base and input tax amount as above.

다. 원고의 부가가치세 신고(2001년 제1기분-2006년 제1기분) 양★★이 발행한 공급가액 합계 316,331,000원의 매입세금계산서(이하 이 사건 매입세금계산서)에 관한 매입세액을 과세기간별 매출세액에서 공제하여 부가가치세 신고

D. Correction Disposition by the Defendant (No. 11, 2007, disposition of objection)

Value-added Tax Correction and Notice as stated in the claim, by deducting each purchase tax amount on the ground that the purchase tax invoice in this case is different from the other tax invoice;

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Evidence Nos. 1, 3, Evidence No. 1, 1, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) Purchase transactions on the instant purchase tax invoice are those on the sales tax invoice and cross-market transactions in each of the pertinent taxable periods. Accordingly, the supply price of the sales corresponding to the instant purchase tax invoice shall also be deducted from the tax base, and the amount of the sales shall be determined by the method of an estimate investigation.

(2) The Defendant imposed a value-added tax only for 3 taxable periods on the merchants who filed a revised return among the merchants in South Korea, the same address as the Plaintiff, but imposed a value-added tax for 11 taxable periods only on the Plaintiff on the ground that the revised return was not filed. This contradicts the principle of tax equity.

B. Determination

(1) As the first note:

According to the provisions of Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act, when the tax invoice under Article 16 is not issued, or when the whole or part of the entries required for the delivered tax invoice are not entered or the input tax amount is entered differently from the fact is not deducted from the output tax amount even if the goods or services were actually supplied, in the case of a sales declaration, it is reasonable to deem that the taxpayer was actually engaged in such sales as long as the taxpayer voluntarily filed a sales report. Even if there was no domestic sales, the portion reported by the taxpayer as the sales in the value-added tax, which is the tax method by which the tax return was filed, is finalized (if the sales tax amount is filed excessively, the taxpayer shall take the procedure of claiming a reduction or correction of the amount, etc.), and the portion reported as the sales, shall not be deemed to have been deducted from the total sales amount under the principle of equity (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Du9917

9 As a matter of course, the tax base and tax amount determined by a report cannot be contested in a lawsuit claiming a disposition of increase or decrease. As such, inasmuch as the Plaintiff already reported sales from the first half to the first half of the year 2001 and became final and conclusive legally, even if the Plaintiff asserts that the sales declaration transaction should be deducted from the tax base as a processing transaction, it cannot be accepted. Accordingly, the assertion that the sales amount should be re-determined by means of an additional investigation is not reasonable.

(2) As the second note:

갑 제2호증, 을 제3, 6호증의 각 기재와 변론 전체의 취지를 종합하면, 피고는 양★★이 발행한 세금계산서와 관련된 남대문상가 상인들에게 2005년 제1기분부터 2006년 제1기분 부가가치세에 관하여 수정신고를 할 것을 권유하면서 불응하는 경우 에는 해당 과세기간 전부에 과세할 수 있다는 취지의 안내서를 발송하였고 수정신고에 응한 상인들에게는 위 3개 과세기간에 대하여 부가가치세 경정처분을 한 사실을 인정할 수 있다.

그런데 피고의 위와 같은 과세처분은 양★★과 관련된 세금계산서 수수내역이 매우 방대하나 과세관청의 인력이 부족한 현실을 감안하여 수정신고를 한 상인들에 대하여는 우선 3개 과세기간에 대하여 경정처분을 한 것일 뿐 나머지 해당 과세기간에 대해 과세를 포기한 것으로 보이지는 않는다. 또한, 결과적으로 그들에게 나머지 해당 과세기간에 대한 경정세액에 관해 기한의 이익을 부여한 셈이 되었더라도 이는 수정신고 안내 당시 이미 예정되어 있던 것이다.

Therefore, it is difficult to view the instant disposition as contrary to the principle of fair taxation solely on the sole basis of the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the above assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed because there is no ground for appeal.