beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a company established on March 16, 199 for the main purpose of domestic steel processing and sales business.
B. The Plaintiff purchased scrap metal equivalent to KRW 2,739,339,100 from A (a trade name is B; hereinafter “B”) during the period of the value-added tax for the first term of January 201, and received a tax invoice corresponding to each purchase content. As to the value-added tax for the first term of January 201, the Plaintiff deducted the input tax amount of KRW 273,93,80 from the output tax amount to the Defendant, and filed a value-added tax for the pertinent taxable period.
C. The Plaintiff purchased scrap metal equivalent to KRW 138,270,750 from C (hereinafter “C”) during the period of the value-added tax for the second term of February 201, and received a tax invoice corresponding to the details of each purchase (hereinafter “each of the instant tax invoices” in total; hereinafter “each of the instant tax invoices”). As to the value-added tax for the second term of February 201, the Plaintiff deducted the input tax amount of KRW 13,827,070 from the output tax amount, and filed a value-added tax return for the pertinent taxable period to the Defendant.
On August 21, 2013, the Defendant issued a false tax invoice to the Plaintiff without a real transaction (including additional tax on an unfair excess refund return) on the ground that the Plaintiff constitutes a false tax invoice issued by B and C without a real transaction, and thus denied the Plaintiff’s tax deduction of the relevant input tax amount on the ground that the tax invoice issued by the Plaintiff is also a false tax invoice. The Defendant issued a revised and notified each of the revised and notified the Plaintiff of the value-added tax amount of KRW 500,586,790 (including additional tax on an unfair excess refund return) for the first term of 2011, value-added tax of KRW 24,496,01.
E. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on October 29, 2013, and the Tax Tribunal received from the Plaintiff on May 29, 2014 constitutes a tax invoice different from the fact by the supplier B and C, and it is deemed that the Plaintiff constitutes a trade party acting in good faith with full duty of care.