logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.06.13 2013구합11170
부가가치세부과처분취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From November 1, 1989, Plaintiff A operated “D gas station” in Defendant A, and Plaintiff B, from January 1, 1995, “F gas station” in Defendant A operated respectively.

Plaintiff

27,545,000 the sum of the supply values at the purchase place in the tax period A (D) business registration number of the second G 209 2 G 536,562,000 1 H J 395,672,00 B (F) 2009 G 2 G 318,455,000 200 1st H J 227,545,000 20

B. The Plaintiffs received transit supply from G, Co., Ltd., Ltd. and H (hereinafter “G”), and received the following tax invoices (hereinafter “each of the instant tax invoices”) during the period of the 2009 and the 1st value added tax in 2010, and the Defendant deducted the supply value under each of the instant tax invoices from the input tax amount at the time of filing the 209 and the 1st value added tax return in 2010.

C. Thereafter, the commissioner of Daejeon Regional Tax Office and the director of the Dobong District Tax Office have determined G and H (hereinafter “G, etc.”) as data that issued false tax invoices, and notified the Defendant of the taxation data.

Accordingly, on March 4, 2013, the Defendant decided to deduct the input tax amount for each of the instant tax invoices that the Plaintiff received from G, etc. on the ground that they were false tax invoices. On March 4, 2013, the Defendant issued a notice of correction of the value-added tax amount of KRW 82,593,240 for the second term portion of the value-added tax year 2009, KRW 58,745,520 for the first term portion of the year 2010, KRW 49,019,70 for the second term of the year 2009, KRW 33,783,670 for the first term of the year 2010 (hereinafter “each of the instant dispositions”).

E. The Plaintiffs were dissatisfied with the request for adjudication on April 18, 2013, but the Tax Tribunal decided to dismiss the request on June 26, 2013.

【Fact-finding, Party A’s Evidence Nos. 1, 21, Party B’s Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, and 6 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiffs.

arrow