beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff falling under the order to revoke below shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. D, from February 200, with the trade name "C", was registered as the place of business in Changwon-si E, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, the place of business, and run a high-speed wholesale and retail business.
In the absence of business registration, the Plaintiff collected scrap metal with the trade name “B” and sold it to D.
B. From March 13, 2012 to May 11, 2012, the Commissioner of the Busan Regional Tax Office conducted a tax investigation on D with respect to D, and notified the Defendant of D of the fact that D was supplied with scrap metal equivalent to KRW 31,394,093,960 in total from the collection of scrap metal in the taxable period from the first to second period of the Value-Added Tax in 2008 to KRW 31,394,093,960, and did not receive legitimate evidence, such as a tax invoice. The Plaintiff’s supply of scrap metal to D in the said taxable period was recognized as the total amount of KRW 366,712,727 (hereinafter “instant sales”).
C. On November 1, 2012, the Defendant imposed and collected value-added tax (including additional tax) on the Plaintiff on November 1, 2012, as described in the attached Table 1’s tax base and amount of tax (hereinafter “attached Table”) for the reason that “the Plaintiff did not omit and file a return on the instant sales.”
[hereinafter “Disposition in this case”, Articles 25 and 26 of the Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9268, Dec. 26, 2008) and Article 74 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22043, Feb. 18, 2010) for the supply price (the value-added tax shall be added to the supply price) of the immediately preceding year from January 2008 to February 2009.
(d)a simplified taxable person of less than 48,000,000 won whose tax base is the proceeds of supply;
On May 14, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed to the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, but was dismissed on July 16, 2013.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 6, evidence 1 to 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 2-1 to 6, and evidence 6-1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff.