Whether anyone can be deemed to have supplied the actual gold-type products among the defaulted enterprises and collaborative enterprises

Even if an owner of a purchased product is in the form of a purchase, if the purchase price is not actually paid for claiming ownership, etc., the owner can not be deemed the supplier.

Article 16 of the Value-Added Tax Act

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

1. The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of a surcharge of KRW 153,308,250 against the Plaintiff on November 5, 2004, exceeding KRW 57,169,460, shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. Of the costs of lawsuit, 1/5 shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of an additional tax of KRW 153,308,250 against the Plaintiff on November 5, 2004, in excess of KRW 35,468,990, shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 21, 2001, 2001, ○○○○○○ Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “○○○○○”) agreed to acquire all intellectual property rights, such as patent rights, etc. related to the preparation of human resources, and gold, which are possessed by ○○○ (hereinafter referred to as “○○”).

B. From January 2001 to January 2003, 2003, ○○○○ Industries Co., Ltd. and seven other companies (hereinafter referred to as “contractor”) purchased gold-types necessary for the manufacture of electric installations and supplies (hereinafter referred to as “the gold-types in this case”) possessed by suppliers, suppliers, supply price of KRW 715,859,092, including supply price (hereinafter referred to as “the tax invoice in this case”), and upon deducting the input tax amount by the above taxable period, the value-added tax was filed.

List of votes

Taxation Period

Suppliers

Value of supply (cost)

1, 2001

○ Chemical Co., Ltd.

180,000,000

1, 2001

○ ○ Electronics

5,000,000

1, 2001

○ Industry

95,454,545

1, 2001

○○ Engineering

50,000,000

1, 2001

000 Plastics

30,000,000

1, 2001

○○ Co., Ltd.

50,000,000

2, 2001

○ Chemical

40,000,000

1, 2002

○○ Co., Ltd.

30,000,000

2, 2002

000 Plastics

25,404,547

1, 2003

000 Plastics

60,000,000

1, 2003

○ Industry

100,000,000

Total

715,859,092

C. The Defendant, even though the actual supplier of the gold-type of this case was ○, deducted the relevant input tax amount on the ground that the tax invoice of this case in which the supplier was entered and received as the supplier was written differently from the fact, and added the input tax amount to the non-deduction for processing and non-deductible for some taxable periods and the omission for sales, and imposed the value-added tax on ○○tech on November 5, 2004 (hereinafter “instant tax disposition”).

Taxation Period

1, 2001

2, 2001

1, 2002

2, 2002

1, 2003

Total

Amount of tax (source)

59,859,080

61,732,300

3,900,000

4,765,390

23,051,480

153,308,250

D. Meanwhile, on September 4, 2003, the Plaintiff succeeded to the rights and obligations of ○○tech by combining ○○tech.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's evidence 1 to 5, Gap's evidence 1 to 3-1, 2, Eul's evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The parties' assertion

The defendant asserts that the tax invoice of this case is legitimate in accordance with relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, while the tax invoice of this case is the tax invoice of this case, because 00 ○○ Tech was subrogated for the supplier's obligation to the subcontractor. Thus, even though the supplier should be stated in 00, the subcontractor should be different from the facts stated in 00 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○, and therefore, the tax invoice of this case is legitimate in that ○ ○ ○

(b) Related statutes;

Omission

(c) Fact of recognition;

The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the statements in evidence Nos. 6, 8, and 9-1 through 12 of evidence Nos. 9, the witness 00, and the purport of the whole pleadings in each testimony of Kim○-○.

(1) On March 21, 2001, between ○○○ and another person, the following agreements were made up: (a) between ○○○ and another person (hereinafter referred to as “instant agreement”).

Article 1 (Subject Matters)

(1) Articles transferred by ○○○ to ○○○○○○○ shall consist of all intellectual property rights related to electrical and electronic materials filed in or already registered in or related to ○○○○○-related domestic and foreign countries, and all gold-types related to the manufacture of installations and material and materials for electrical and electrical management, all kinds of gold-types related to the manufacture of materials and materials for criminal management, instruments, materials and equipment, etc. currently kept by each subcontractor

Article 2 (Method of Transfer and Receipt)

(2) Gold-type, materials, equipment, etc. currently kept by a collaborative company shall be confirmed as to whether the ○○tech has been kept by the collaborative company, and shall be deemed as having been transferred by transfer or acquisition by the collaborative company with the seal affixed on the transfer slip by the collaborative company. The ○○○ is recognized as being transferred without any language with the seal affixed by the two raw elements.

Article 3 (Payment of Price)

(1) The amount of transfer of an object shall be three billion won.

② The above transfer proceeds are the amount of ○○○○○’s total debt incurred due to the ○○’s default, which shall be borne by the ○○○○○○tech, and the amount, method, time, etc. of payment shall be borne only within the said limit, and shall be handled by consultation among creditors of the ○○○○tech directly.

⑤ Since ○○○ Tech does not succeed to the ○○○○’s obligation even after acquiring the said object, it does not mean that ○○ Tech succeeds to the said obligation itself, ○○ Tech and the creditor of ○ ○ ○○ Tech are not liable for the repayment of ○ Tech’s obligation, for which

6. ○○○tech shall make every effort to pay its debts by mutual consultation with all creditors of ○○ within the limit of the amount set forth in the above (1).

(2) The parts related to the formation and foundation of the electric war produced by ○○○ were produced in the form of gold produced by ○○ upon ○○’s request from a collaborative entity to produce parts in the form of gold produced by ○○ upon the request from ○○ or marina, and supplied them to ○○. Meanwhile, the gold paper produced by the collaborative entity upon the request from ○○○○ was owned by ○○ upon the partial payment of the price of supplied goods.

(3) Around June 26, 2000, ○○○ was in a situation where the supply price cannot be properly paid to the collaborative company due to the closure of business on December 28 of the same year.

(4) On April 3, 2001 to April 18, 2003, 2003, ○○○○○ was subrogated to perform the obligation to pay to the collaborative entity, and the instant tax invoice received from the collaborative entity, to the effect that: (a) negotiation was made separately with the collaborative entity on the acquisition price of the instant gold model, etc., which was possessed by the collaborative entity; and (b) payment was made in total of KRW 715,859,092; and (c) payment was made from the collaborative entity.

(5) In order to secure intellectual property rights such as trademark rights provided as security by ○○ Mutual Savings and Finance Company upon obtaining a loan from ○○○ Mutual Savings and Finance Company, the ○○○○○○○○ Mutual Savings and Finance Company paid approximately KRW 1.6 billion out of the transfer price of the instant agreement 3 billion, and the remainder of KRW 1.4 billion out of the transfer price to ○○ Mutual Savings and Finance Company, and there was no money actually paid to ○○○○.

(6) On the other hand, the value-added tax for KRW 434,863,868 of the processed and purchased building in 2001 includes 56,532,300 of the value-added tax for KRW 434,863,868 of the processed and purchased building (hereinafter the same shall apply) and value-added tax for KRW 3,921,00 of the total of KRW 637,160 of the value-added tax for KRW 3,921,00 of the omitted sales (= KRW 56,532,300 + KRW 637,160 of the value-added tax for KRW 56,532,637,160), and the tax amount related to the gold type in this case is the sum of KRW 96,138,790 (including penalty tax) as follows.

Taxation Period

1, 2001

2, 2001

1, 2002

2, 2002

1, 2003

Total

Amount of tax (source)

59,859,080

5,200,000

3,900,000

4,128,230

23,051,480

96,138,790

D. Determination

However, even if ○○○○○○○, including the instant gold model, decided to acquire all intellectual property rights and assets related to the development of the human resources, including the instant gold model, the amount of payment, payment method, and time of the purchase price paid to ○○○○○, was settled through consultation with the cooperative companies directly. In fact, there was no acquisition price paid to ○○○. Thus, even though the instant gold model was agreed to belong to ○○○’s ownership in form or to be reverted to ○○ at the time of full payment of the price for supply, ○○ cannot claim ownership of the instant gold model as it actually remains unpaid, since ○○○ was the cooperative company’s possession of the right to dispose of the instant gold model, and rather, ○○○ was the cooperative company’s possession of the instant gold model in the context of the instant gold model. Accordingly, if the cooperative company received some of the price for supply from ○○○ and its establishment of the instant gold model in excess of the instant gold model, it cannot be viewed that the instant gold model agreement was written on the premise that the instant gold model was owned.

Therefore, the part of the disposition of this case which exceeds 57,169,460 won (the value-added tax related to processing purchase and omission of sales) is illegal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition, and it is accepted, and the remainder is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.