Whether it is a false gold bullion tax invoice without real transactions

The mere fact that the processing purchase ratio compared to the total purchase amount reaches 96% cannot be determined definitely by the purchaser’s sales tax invoice as the total processing tax invoice, etc., it is difficult to regard the purchaser as a non-real transaction tax invoice.

Article 16 (Tax Invoice)

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

1. The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax of KRW 11,462,860 against the Plaintiff on January 2, 2008 shall be revoked.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Details of the imposition;

A. From October 4, 2003, the Plaintiff closed its business on December 24, 2004, 2004, with the trade name, “○○○ ○○ ○○ 69 located in Seoul, ○ ○ ○ ○ 69,” thereby running gold bullion wholesale and retail business.

B. On January 25, 2004, the Plaintiff filed a return of value-added tax for the second period portion on January 25, 2003 by deducting the input tax amount of KRW 70,264,910 (hereinafter “the instant tax invoice”) received from the ○○ Ga Co., Ltd. located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “○ ○○ Ga”) from the output tax amount.

C. On January 2, 2008, the Defendant issued a correction and notification of KRW 11,462,860, value-added tax for the second period of 2003 on the ground that the instant tax invoice was a false tax invoice for which no real transaction was conducted (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

D. On February 20, 2008, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on the instant disposition on February 20, 2008, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal on May 19, 2008.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-3, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 7-1, Eul evidence 1-5, Eul evidence 2, 5, 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition of imposition is lawful.

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff actually purchased gold bullion from the non-party company and paid the price in full, and since the tax invoice of this case is a normal transaction, the defendant's disposition of this case on a different premise is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

Article 16 (Tax Invoice)

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

Article 21 (Determination and Correction of Value-Added Tax Act)

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) The tax invoice of this case (A) is written on November 3, 2003 by the date of preparation; the product is currently written on November 3, 2003; the quantity is 5,00 (g); the unit price is 14,052,982; the supply price is 70,264,910 won; the tax amount is 7,026,491 won.

on November 3, 2003, the Plaintiff transferred the total of KRW 40,000,600 and KRW 77,292,600,00 to the account in the name of the Plaintiff (Account Number 303-04-628,00) on two occasions to the non-party company by means of dives banks.

Consolidatedly, the books of purchase and sale (Evidence A 3) prepared by the Plaintiff are written on November 3, 2003 by purchasing five gold bullion from the non-party company in KRW 77,291,401.

On August 10, 2005, the Plaintiff prepared and submitted to the Defendant a written confirmation of transaction details (Evidence A 4-1) that the transaction of gold bullion pursuant to the instant tax invoice between the non-party company was genuine transaction. On the same day, Cho Young-young, the representative director of the non-party company, sold gold bullion 5 kilograms to the Plaintiff on November 3, 2003, and accordingly issued and issued the instant tax invoice (Evidence A 4-2).

(v)Around June 2007, the head of Sungdong Tax Office conducted on the part of the non-party company an on-site verification and correction of value-added tax. On April 14, 2003, the non-party company closed its business ex officio on August 26, 2004. From the first to the first half of 2003, the non-party company received the processed purchase tax invoice from the non-party company on the tax conversion issue without supplying the goods by converting the processed tax invoice into taxation taxation, and then again issued the processed sales tax invoice to the non-party company for tax conversion, tax exporter, precious metal wholesaler, etc. (the role of the non-party company in so-called "dominant company" that acts as a broker for the transaction of the non-party company to receive the input tax amount unfairly), the non-party company received the processed sales tax invoice from the non-party company's representative director in advance, and then it was notified that the non-party company and the non-party company's total sales tax invoice were supplied to the non-party 1 (the counter-party 170g).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-3, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 3, Gap evidence 4-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

(1) In a lawsuit seeking revocation of taxation, the burden of proving the facts of taxation is, in principle, at the tax authority. A tax invoice on some of the expenses reported by the taxpayer is proved to be falsely prepared without real transaction by the Defendant, who is the tax authority, and it should be proved to the extent that the purpose of the cost claimed by the taxpayer and the other party to the payment are false. However, the burden of proving that the cost has been actually paid shall be converted to the burden of proving that the cost has been actually paid, and it is easy for the taxpayer to present all the materials, such as the account book and documentary evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Nu8192, Sept. 26, 1997).

(2) Although it is clear that the sales revenue of the non-party company was issued without actual gold bullion transactions, the mere fact that the sales revenue of the non-party company is 8% can not be determined as issuing the processed tax invoice without actual gold bullion transactions, and it is hard to conclude that the non-party company's sales revenue of the non-party company was 8% of the total sales revenue of the non-party company. It is hard to conclude that the non-party company's sales revenue of the non-party company was 8% of the total sales revenue of the non-party company without actual gold bullion transactions, and it is hard to conclude that the non-party company's sales revenue of the non-party company was 8% of the total sales revenue of the non-party company. The plaintiff's sales revenue of the non-party company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party sales revenue revenue of the plaintiff company's non-party company's non-party company's non-party 2.

Fidelity, the Defendant’s disposition of this case, based on the premise that the instant tax invoice is a false tax invoice, is unlawful, and the Plaintiff’s assertion is with merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.