beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff, who operated the franchise restaurant (hereinafter “C”) located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, was an entrepreneur who ordered alcoholic beverages from January 2, 2010 to February 2, 2012, and received the supply of alcoholic beverages in the name of Taejin chain Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Seojin chain”), and was issued a purchase tax invoice of KRW 119,424,00 in total (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) and was deducted from the output tax amount under the instant tax invoice at the time of filing the value-added tax return.
B. On October 14, 2013, to November 30, 2013, the director of the Central Regional Tax Office issued processing tax invoices to the Sungjin chain and D who actually committed the act of violating the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, and then notified the Defendant of this fact as taxation data.
C. On December 1, 2014, the Defendant, upon receipt of the above notice, deducted input tax amount on the value of the pertinent public fund on the ground that the instant tax invoice constitutes a false tax invoice, and imposed upon the Plaintiff each disposition of imposition of value-added tax amounting to KRW 3,49,650 for the first period of January 1, 2010, KRW 6,116,750 for the second period of February 2, 2010, KRW 4,189,120 for the first period of January 2, 2011, KRW 4,69,310 for the second period of February 2, 201, KRW 4,698,310 for the second period of January 2, 201, KRW 254,240 for the second period of January 2, 2012, KRW 2,357,500 for the second period of February 2,
(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.
The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on January 7, 2015, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed it on May 13, 2015, and the Plaintiff appealed and filed the instant lawsuit on June 22, 2015.
Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, and Eul evidence 1 and 2.