logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2018.09.12 2017구합106892
부가가치세등부과처분취소
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

Details of the disposition

The plaintiff is a corporation that engages in wholesale and retail business of broadcasting equipment, CCTV, etc. in Sinjin-si.

From February 2, 2014 to January 2015, the Plaintiff received the purchase tax invoice of KRW 254,570,000 from C, and the purchase tax invoice of KRW 320,00,000 (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) from D (hereinafter “D”), and then included the input tax amount as the sales price at the time of the return of the value-added tax after receiving the deduction of the input tax amount.

From October 31, 2016 to November 30, 2016, the Defendant issued a revised notice of KRW 67,950,190, corporate tax for the business year 2014, KRW 98,943,820, and KRW 247,027,000, KRW 385,000, and KRW 00,000 for the business year 2014, deeming that the Plaintiff received only the instant tax invoice without being supplied with goods or services, and that the Plaintiff received only the instant tax invoice on January 2, 2017.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on August 28, 2017 by seeking the revocation of the disposition of imposition of corporate tax and the notice of change in the amount of income among the instant disposition, but was dismissed.

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 6, 10, and 15 (including a serial number), and the defendant's defense on the whole purport of the pleadings as to the main purpose of the safety defense, the defendant's defense on this case's disposition was conducted by the tax Tribunal only with respect to the disposition of imposing corporate tax and the notice of change in income amount during the disposition of this case, and the disposition of imposing value-added tax did not go through the pre-trial procedure. Thus, this part should

Judgment

The main sentence of Article 56 (2) of the Framework Act on National Taxes is illegal as provided in Article 55.

arrow