Daegu High Court 2009Nu1267 (No. 29, 2010)

early 207Gu4649 (Law No. 21, 2008)

The sales and purchase tax invoices of this case are false tax invoices.

In light of the fact that a judgment that a tax invoice issued by a customer constitutes a false tax invoice is issued and confirmed, the purchase and sale tax invoice in this case was prepared or delivered without actual transaction, or the supplier or the recipient was prepared differently from the actual transaction.

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

2010du4209 Disposition of revocation of imposition of value-added tax, etc.

AA Corporation

Head of North Daegu Tax Office

Daegu High Court Decision 2009Nu1267 Decided January 29, 2010

May 10, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged the following facts: (a) the Plaintiff prepared and delivered the purchase tax invoice of this case and distributed it through processing without any actual transaction; and (b) in a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the disposition imposing value-added tax by the AA comprehensive company related to the sales of the AA comprehensive company, including the purchase tax invoice of this case, the decision was made that the transaction tax invoice of this case was processed without any actual transaction or prepared differently from the actual transaction, and constitutes a false tax invoice; (c) the Plaintiff issued the processed tax invoice without any actual transaction to the retailers in the Plaintiff’s workplace; and (d) the Plaintiff received 3.5% of the supply price after the Plaintiff issued the processed tax invoice without any actual transaction, and ordered the employees to receive the corresponding amount of the supply price indicated in the processed tax invoice from the account and return it in cash excluding the above price; and (e) as a result, the court below did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the purchase and sale tax invoice of this case and did not err in the misapprehension of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.