logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017. 08. 23. 선고 2017두45261 판결
(심리불속행) 사실과 다른 세금계산서에 해당한다.[국패]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Seoul High Court-2016-Nu-5829 ( April 18, 2017)

Title

(A) It constitutes a tax invoice different from the facts.

Summary

(In the first instance, the substance of the actual transaction is entirely carried out by the name borrower, and even if it is issued under the name of the name lender, it is reasonable to deem that the tax invoice under these names constitutes a false tax invoice.

Related statutes

Article 16 (Tax Invoice)

Cases

Disposition Disposition Imposing Value-Added Tax

Plaintiff-Appellant

AA

Defendant-Appellee

Head of Ansan Tax Office et al.

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court 2016Nu55829

Imposition of Judgment

August 23, 2017

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against each appellant.

Reasons

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but their arguments on the grounds of appeal by the appellant fall under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, and therefore, all of the appeals are dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per

arrow