Cheongju District Court 2012Guhap1254 ( October 24, 2013)

No good faith or negligence of the plaintiff may be recognized when a non-ferrous metal supplier receives a false tax invoice different from the fact entered in a false manner.

The instant tax invoice corresponds to a tax invoice different from the fact that the Plaintiff engaged in the non-ferrous metal industry for several years, the transaction has an exceptional aspect compared to the ordinary distribution structure, and it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff was able to exercise due diligence required in the course of the transaction in light of the possibility of ex post facto manipulation of the measurement certificate and the specifications of the transaction. Thus, good faith and negligence cannot be recognized.

(Cheongju)Revocation of a disposition imposing value-added tax 2013Nu193

KimA

Head of Chungcheong Tax Office

Cheongju District Court Decision 2012Guhap1254 Decided January 24, 2013

March 26, 2014

April 23, 2014

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The defendant's imposition of the first instance value-added tax on September 2, 201 against the plaintiff on September 2, 2011 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning of this court's explanation concerning this case is that the court of first instance deleted part of the first instance Nos. 7-2 through 4-2 (this court testified that B had worked as an employee of KimCC in this court, and the statement of wage and salary income or daily wage and salary income submitted by KimCC does not include any matters concerning B) and add some of them to each part of the first instance trial Nos. 7-21 and 10-13, and the judgment on the plaintiff's assertion is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for the addition of the judgment on the plaintiff's assertion as stated in Paragraph 2 below, this court shall accept it as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

Even if each of the tax invoices in this case can be seen as a false tax invoice, the Plaintiff was issued a business registration certificate and issued to the KimCC, and confirmed that KimCC would work with 10 employees with physical facilities, such as open-air stations, relays, and house studs. When KimCC was supplied with non-ferrouss, the Plaintiff was issued a detailed statement of transactions, measurement certificate, tax invoice, etc. with detailed transaction details, and transferred the transaction price to the account in the name of KimCC. The Plaintiff asserted that KimCC was not aware that it was a disguised business operator, and that there was no negligence with no knowledge.

Considering the various circumstances in the judgment of the first instance court, the date of issuance of the business registration certificate (No. 6) of Dmers (representative KimCC) submitted by the Plaintiff, claiming that at the time of receipt of each of the instant tax invoices issued under Dmers name, the Plaintiff was provided with evidence supporting that the relevant transaction was actual transaction, and that the date of issuance of Dmers (No. 11-1) among the instant tax invoices, the date of preparation of the first tax invoice (No. 11-1) between the Plaintiff and Dmers (GlaCC), which was earlier than the date of January 21, 2010, is stated as the " March 31, 2010, which was earlier than the date of preparation of the tax invoice (No. 11-1-1), it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff was not negligent by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance sharing the conclusion is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.