Daejeon District Court 2012Guhap1398 ( October 23, 2013)

No good faith or negligence of the plaintiff who received a false tax invoice shall be recognized.

(As in the judgment of the first instance court) It cannot be deemed that a business entity that engages in petroleum retail business for about 25 years has fulfilled its duty of care as a good manager, considering that it has been supplied with oil from a mutual unsound agent through a petroleum purchase with a motor vehicle and has transacted without additional confirmation after receiving a defective shipment ticket.

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

2013Nu1735 Disposition of revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

AA Commercial Corporation

The Director of Budget Office

Daejeon District Court Decision 2012Guhap1398 Decided October 23, 2013

January 23, 2014

February 13, 2014

1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance court is revoked. The defendant's imposition of each of the value-added tax on the first term portion of 2008 against the plaintiff on December 1, 2010, the first term portion of 2008, the second term portion of 2008, the first term portion of 2009, the first term portion of OOOO, the second term portion of 2009, the second term group of OOOOOO for 2008, and the imposition of each corporate tax on the OOO for 2008 business year and the OOO for 209 business year.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The court's explanation on this case is the same as the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus cite it as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just based on its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.