beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The following facts of the disposition may be acknowledged by taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence 2-1, 2, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1 through 8, Eul evidence 2-1, Eul evidence 6, and the whole purport of pleadings:
The Plaintiff is a person who supplies scrap metal to Nonparty C in the trade name of “B.”
C has registered a business with the trade name of "D" and run a wholesale and retail business of "Masan-si E" in Changwon-si, Changwon-si.
B. As a result, the Busan regional tax office conducted a tax investigation on D from March 13, 2012 to May 11, 2012, it did not receive a tax invoice even if D was supplied with scrap metal equivalent to KRW 31,394,093,960 from the collection of scrap metal during the taxable period of value-added tax during the period from March 13, 201 to February 2, 2011. Among them, it confirmed that among them, the value of scrap metal supplied by the Plaintiff is KRW 1,121,495,000 (hereinafter “sale of this case”), and notified the Defendant of the result of the investigation.
C. On February 1, 2013, the Defendant determined that the Plaintiff failed to file a return on the omission of the sales of the instant case on the grounds of the findings of the investigation notified as above, and imposed and collected the value-added tax (including the additional tax) on the aggregate of the tax bases as indicated below (hereinafter “instant disposition”).
Tax base for the taxable period (won) of 162,436,00 28,567,610 208,515,9309 109,710,710,325,325,607,450,450 28,2010 208 208 35,515,930 102,070,000 17,487,770 2010 209 153,325,607,450 2,607,450 202,169,707,1307,7197,207,1307,197,207,1307,207,209,207,205,209,707
D. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for examination with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on May 3, 2013, but was dismissed on July 16, 2013.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff omitted the sales of this case without filing a report.