National High Court Decision 2007Da1109 ( November 08, 2007)

Whether a processing tax invoice related to gold bullion has been received

In the process of gold bullion trade, it is difficult to regard it as a false tax invoice solely on the basis that there is a bombane company and evaded the surtax, and that the gold bullion exempted from tax in a short period is exported after purchasing it, and the export price is lower than domestic market price.

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

Article 6 (Supply of Goods)

Article 7 (Supply of Value-Added Tax Act)

1. The Defendant’s imposition of value-added tax of 105,589,290 won on October 18, 2006 and value-added tax of 1,763,280,930 won on the first term portion of 2003 against the Plaintiff on October 18, 2006 shall be revoked.

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

It is the same as the disposition.

1. Details of the disposition;

가. 원고는 2003. 6. 2.부터 2004. 2. 28.까지 부산 서구 ☆☆동3가 33-15에서 '★★상사'라는 상호로 귀금속 도매업을 영위한 자로, 2003년도 1기분과 2기분의 과세기간 동안에 별지 1 거래내역 기재와 같이 주식회사 골드●●●(개인사업체의 경우에는 별도로 표시하고, 이하 '주식회사'를 생략한다) 등 국내의 도매상들으로부터 금지금(金地金, gold bar, 이하 원고가 매입한 금지금을 '이 사건 금지금'이라고 한다)을 매입하여 별지 1 거래 내역 기재와 같이 홍콩에 소재한 '♥♥♥ 트레이딩 컴퍼니'(♥♥♥ Trading Company, 이하 '♥♥♥ 트레이딩'이라고 한다) 등에 영세율 수출을 하였다고 신고하여 부가가치세 합계 1,868,870,000원을 환급받았다.

B. The Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff would have received the value-added tax unfairly by purchasing and exporting gold bullion normally in collusion with the purchaser and the exporter for the purpose of tax evasion. After denying the Plaintiff’s zero-rate sales, the Plaintiff’s purchase tax invoice received from ○○○, etc. during the pertinent taxable period (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) was deducted from the input tax amount on the instant tax invoice on October 18, 2006 on the ground that all of the purchase tax invoices received from the Plaintiff during the pertinent taxable period were false tax invoices, and subsequently, the Plaintiff issued a revised notice on October 18, 2006 of KRW 141,458,720 (the Defendant corrected the amount of value-added tax to be reduced to KRW 105,589,290, 105, 2,310,624,790 (the Defendant subsequently deducted the amount of penalty tax, excluding the amount of penalty tax) for the second period of two years in 203 (the Defendant subsequently corrected the amount to KRW 1,763,280,90).

C. On April 5, 2007, the Plaintiff asserted for the adjudgment against the Director of the National Tax Tribunal, but the Director of the National Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on November 8, 2007.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 9, Eul evidence 1 to 1 (including numbers, and hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff asserts that each disposition of the instant gold bullion is unlawful on the grounds of the following circumstances: (a) the Plaintiff paid the purchase price, including value-added tax, and then exported the gold bullion to Hong Kong company located in the normal course and received the payment accurately; (b) so, all of the gold bullion transactions are normal transactions consistent with the actual transaction; and (c) even if the Plaintiff’s funeral business entity is the said purchaser, the Plaintiff fulfilled its duty of due care for normal trade, such as confirming the Plaintiff’s business registration certificate and the account number, etc. in its trade with the said purchaser; (d) as the Plaintiff fulfilled its duty of due care for normal trade, the Defendant committed each disposition of the instant gold bullion on the basis

(b) Related statutes;

Attached Form 2 is as shown in the relevant statutes.

C. Facts of recognition

(1) The ordinary form, etc. of gold bullion transactions for the purpose of tax evasion;

(A) According to Article 11(1)1 of the Value-Added Tax Act, the supply of exported goods is subject to zero-rate tax rate. Article 106-3 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 6762 of Dec. 11, 2002 and enforced from July 1, 2003) and Article 106-3 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17829 of Dec. 30, 2002 and enforced from July 1, 2003) provide that the value-added tax shall be paid for gold bullion imported by gold craftsmen and refiners who received tax exemption recommendation from trading tax-free gold bullion, and for gold bullion imported by gold craftsmen, etc. upon receiving tax exemption recommendation from the tax-free gold bullion importer.

(B) Such abuse of the value-added tax rate or tax exemption system, thereby importing gold bullion, and distributing it as tax exemption through multiple stages wholesalers. The so-called so-called "large carbon business" (the fact that the gold bullion purchased through the value-free tax exemption is converted into a taxation amount, and the sales tax invoice is issued and issued if the gold bullion is sold at a price lower than the purchase price, and the trader is allowed to deduct the input tax amount, and he/she does not pay the value-added tax) is converted into a taxation amount, and the "large coal business" is exported to distribute it through various stages wholesalers, and then the "large coal business" is evaded the value-added tax collected and the exporter is entitled to receive the unpaid value-added tax from 202 to 202, especially among the precious metal business entities located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government. The detailed attitude of the above "large coal business" is as follows.

1) In appearance, gold bullion is distributed through the stages of “foreign enterprises ? importer ? tax-free wholesale ? tax-free wholesale ? tax-free wholesale ? taxation ? taxation ? taxation ? taxation ? ? foreign enterprises (hereinafter referred to as “related enterprises” in the above transaction lines excluding foreign enterprises, receiving and accessing enterprises, and heavy carbon companies). The transaction price is paid in sequence from the exporter to the importer to the importer, but in particular, the taxable wholesalers are only issuing tax invoices according to the specific persons or specific enterprises, and they do not actually trade or transport gold bullion.

2) After purchasing gold bullion as a tax-free gold and selling it as a tax-free gold, the company evades the value-added tax by withdrawing and concealing the profit within a short period, and closing the business. In such a case, the company sells gold bullion with the supply price lower than the purchase price, but the supply price added to the value-added tax is higher than the purchase price, and because the transaction-free value is not paid, the company obtains a substantial benefit from the difference between the supply price and the purchase price.

3) Meanwhile, the value-added tax collected by a company in each phase after the transaction is successively transferred by means of deducting the input tax amount by using the tax invoice received from the immediately preceding phase company. Ultimately, the exporter’s export of gold bullion and then to be refunded by the State according to applying the zero-rate tax rate. As such, among the amount refunded by the State, the substantial portion of the value-added tax paid by the company is the ultimate source of the profits from the wide coal business. The profit is distributed to the domestic companies involved in the wide coal business in the form of marin at each transaction stage, or the amount calculated by the percentage of the profits of the wide coal company, which is separately paid to the participating companies. The difference between the import price and the export price (the export price is lower than the import price if based on the domestic companies) is allocated to the foreign companies involved in the large coal business in the large coal business.

4) In order to maximize profits, gold bullion in a short period is distributed as much as possible within a certain amount of time in order to maximize profits. In order to prevent disputes among the participating companies, or accidents such as loss of prices, most uniform poles (referring to those who prepare for the revenue of gold bullion in the first part of the heavy carbon business network) operate simultaneously with the exporting company and the importing company, and place the former owner in a direct transaction with the bombing company. The former owner actually determines the volume, unit price, and margin of the transaction at each stage of transaction, and the former owner is actually determined in fact at each stage of transaction, and the series of transactions from the importing company to the exporting company are transported immediately to the exporting company by building the transaction stage, and most of them are only formal carriages for the normal transaction ( even if they are transported every stage of transaction at each stage of transaction).

(2) Matters as to the purchaser of the gold bullion of this case

이 사건 금지금 거래의 매입처들은 별지 제1 거래내역 기재와 같이 골드●●●, ◎◎상사(원고의 처형인 정◇◇이 운영하던 개인사업체인 골드◆◆과 동일한 업체로 보인다), △△, ▲▲주얼리, ◇◇금은, □□금은, ■■골드의 7개 업체인데, 이들은 ▽▽무역, ▼▼쥬얼리, ◁◁물산, ◀◀골드, ▷▷▷골드, ▶▶지앤에스 등 전형적인 폭탄업체 와 ♤♤금은, ♠♠골드 등 도관업체를 거쳐 이 사건 금지금을 매입하였다.

(3) Matters pertaining to the Agency for the Export of Gold Metals

홍콩 네이선 로드 786 ♡♡♡♡♡♡ 상업건물 6층에 소재한 ♥♥♥ 트레이eld은 ♧♧♧홍과 류♣♣♣가 경영하고 있는데, 이들은 위 장소에서 위에서 본 골드 아펙스도 같이 운영하고 있고, 위 두 업체의 종업원 수는 총 5명이다. 또한 위 ♧♧♧흥은 골드 ●●●의 설사주로 추정되는 박◉◉이 1995년경 금괴밀수사건으로 인하여 징역형을 선고받은 사건에서 박◉◉과 공모한 자이다.

(4) The specific details of the gold prohibited transaction, etc.

(A) The Plaintiff’s workplace located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Busan Metropolitan City, 33-15 is about 3 to 4 square meters, and there was no safe or security facility for safe viewing of gold bullion, and there was no electricity charge (except for the common electricity charge). The Plaintiff actually performed all the duties in the office of 401, the office of YY-gu, Seo-gu, Busan, in Seoul, where the said office is located.

(B) The Plaintiff’s purchase and export details of the instant gold bullion are as shown in the attached Table 1 transaction statement, purchase place, sales place, financial transaction details, export declaration certificate, etc. submitted by the Plaintiff.

(다) 이 사건 금지금의 수출은 원고가 직접 또는 운반책인 김▣▣, 김◐◐, 정◑◑을 이용하여 ♥♥♥ 트레이딩에게 직접 전달하는 소위 핸드캐리CHand carry) 방식으로 이루어졌는데, 위 김▣▣, 김◐◐, 정◑◑은 골드◆◆, 우리무역의 금지금도 함께 운반 하였다.

(D) The Plaintiff exported gold bullion over 37 times from July 28, 2003 to December 30, 2003. The export declaration unit price reported by the Plaintiff is below 4 to 5 US$ 5, respectively. At the time, the domestic market price of gold bullion was higher than the international market price, but did not sell gold bullion to the domestic market generation on the same day, but it was higher than the purchase price by the Plaintiff.

(마) 원고가 2003. 7. 28.부터 2003. 12. 30.까지 기간 동안 수출한 이 사건 금지금 중에는 일련번호가 동일한 골드바가 반복하여 수입, 수출된 사례가 확인되고 있는데, 예컨대 금종상사가 2003. 10. 24. 수입한 일련번호 801710의 골드바는 원고가 수출한 후 2003. 11. 27. ▒▒▒▒▒가 이를 다시 수입하는 등 5회에 걸쳐 재수입되었다가 재수출되었다.

(f) The Plaintiff did not receive a divisional certificate under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Refund of Customs Duties, etc. Levied on Raw Materials for Export, which is necessary for the exporter to refund 3% of customs duties when exporting gold bullion

(사) 서울중앙지방검찰청은 원고의 이 사건 금지금에 관한 부가가치세 18억 원의 포탈혐의에 대하여 2008. 4. 29. 원고가 대신상사를 운영하면서 부가세 포탈 거래라인에 가담하여 4억 5,000만 원 상당의 불법수익을 취득한 사실은 인정되나 서부산세무서에서 피의자의 상가건물 등을 압류한 점, 골드◆◆에 대한 9억 3,000만 원 상당의 부가가치세 환급이 거부되어 약 4억 7,000만 원 상당의 손해를 보는 결과가 발생한 점 등 그 정상에 참작할 사유가 있다는 이유로 기소유예 처분을 하였다.

[인정 근거] 다툼 없는 사실, 갑 제3 내지 10호증, 올 제2, 4, 5호증, 을 제7호증의 2, 4, 을 제12, 21호증의 각 기재, 증인 김▣▣의 증언, 변론 전체의 취지

D. Determination

(1) Article 1(1)1 of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that "the supply of goods as taxable subject to value-added tax" and Article 6(1) provides that "the delivery or transfer of goods shall be based on all contractual or legal grounds." In light of the characteristics of value-added tax as multi-stage transaction tax, delivery or transfer under Article 6(1) of the Value-Added Tax Act includes all acts of causing the transfer of authority to use and consume goods, regardless of the existence of actual profits (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 85Nu286, Sept. 24, 1985; 9Du9247, Mar. 13, 201; 9Du9247, etc.). In this case, the issue of whether a specific transaction among a series of transactions constitutes the supply of goods under the Value-Added Tax Act shall be determined on the grounds that there is no specific transaction under Article 29(1)2 of the Value-Added Tax Act, including the purpose and circumstance of each transaction, the ownership of the transaction, and the owner of payment.

(2) 위와 갈은 법리에 비추어 이 사건에 판하여 보건대, 앞서 본 바와 같이 수입업 체로부터 수출업체에 이르기까지 실제로 금지금이 거래되었고(금지금의 운송경로가 일부 생략되었다 하더라도 거래관계가 없었다고 볼 수 없다), 원고는 2003. 6. 16.부터 2003. 12. 30.까지 사이에 이 사건 매입처들인 주식회사 골드●●●를 비롯한 7개 사업자로부터 이 사건 금지금을 각 매입하고 그 대금을 모두 지급한 후 이 사건 매입처들로부터 이 사건 금지금 거래에 따른 매입세금계산서를 각 교부받았으며, 이 사건 금지금을 홍콩의 ♥♥♥ 트레이딩 등에 수출한 이상, 피고 주장과 같이 이 사건 금지금이 수입되어 수출되기까지의 일련의 전체거래가 모두 짧은 기간 내에 이루어지고, 그 중간 단계에 부가가치세가 면제되는 금지금을 매입한 다음 이를 과세로 전환하여 공급하면서 세금계산서를 작성ㆍ교부하고 그 부가가치세 상당액을 납부하지 않는 이른바 폭탄업체가 존재하고 있으며, 원고가 이를 가공하지 아니한 채 매입한 상태 그대로 수출하였고, 수출가격이 국내시세보다 낮았다거나 관세환급을 위한 분할증명서를 수수하지 아니하였다는 등의 사정만 으로는, 이 사건 금지금 거래가 세금계산서만을 발행하여 수수한 것이거나 폭탄영업을 실제 거래로 위장하기 위하여 금지금이 인도되고 대금이 지급되는 외관만을 취한 명목상의 거래로서 부가가치세 과세대상이 되는 재화의 공급이 아니라고 단정하기 어렵고, 따라서 이 사건 금지금 거래에 따라 수취한 이 사건 세금계산서 역시 그 계산서상의 공급자와 실제 공급자가 다르게 기재된 것으로서 '사설과 다른 세금계산서'에 해당한다고 보기는 어렵다 할 것이다.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, each of the dispositions of this case without deducting input tax amounts on the premise that the tax invoice of this case constitutes a false tax invoice shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.