beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On June 8, 2012, the Defendant was awarded a contract for C Formation Project on the ground B (hereinafter “instant construction”) at the time of Pakistan, which was ordered at the time of Pakistan, and was awarded a contract for KRW 259,60,000 for the construction cost to D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) on July 30, 2012. However, on November 8, 2012, the construction cost was increased to KRW 469,950,420.
B. On the other hand, the Defendant, due to the violation of law, etc., employs E, who is an employee of D as the Defendant’s field director, and actually carries out the instant construction, but the tax invoice for the business entity participating in the instant construction was issued under the name of the Defendant, and the Defendant paid the price directly to the construction business entity.
The value of supply of invoice and the total amount of tax paid on September 28, 2012, 200 won: 25,042,60 won on October 31, 2012; 11,292,00 won on November 11, 2012; 292,00 won on October 31, 2012; 31,074,000 won on October 31, 2012; 30,049, 30. 5,03,00. 13,03,03,00. 13,05,00 won on June 20, 203, 204; 12,000 won on November 3, 205, 203, 203; 13,005; 12,000 won on November 30, 2012;
C. The Plaintiff’s Intervenor engaged in construction equipment leasing business under the trade name of “F”. From September 11, 2012 to June 11, 2013, the Plaintiff leased construction equipment, etc. to the construction site of the instant construction project, and issued a tax invoice to the Defendant from September 28, 2012 to July 18, 2013, as indicated in the following [Attachment], and the Defendant paid part of the relevant construction cost (hereinafter “instant construction cost”).
Plaintiff
On August 28, 2014, the Intervenor failed to pay a total of 12 national taxes, including value-added tax and global income tax, which is KRW 190,067,650, and on March 26, 2014, the head of the Goyang Tax Office affiliated with the Plaintiff attached the instant claim for the construction cost against the Defendant of the Intervenor.