Whether it is subject to imposition of additional tax due to failure to submit a list of total account statements by customer

The agricultural products of this case cannot be deemed to have been sold to ○○ and ○○ upon entrustment by farmers, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise, and the fact that the sales account of the agricultural products was received from ○○ and ○○○○, alone, cannot be deemed to have a duty to submit a list of total sales account by customer.

Article 76 of the Corporate Tax Act

1. The disposition imposed by the Defendant on the Plaintiff on December 1, 2001 at KRW 3,129,40 of the corporate tax of KRW 3,309,858 and the corporate tax of KRW 1,509,60 of the corporate tax of KRW 1,500 and the corporate tax of KRW 6,391,953 of the corporate tax of KRW 200 shall be revoked.

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

The same shall apply to the order.

1. On December 1, 2001, the Defendant imposed an additional tax of KRW 5,837,960, KRW 620,730 on the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 76 (9) 2 of the Corporate Tax Act on the ground that the Plaintiff had a duty to submit to the Defendant a list of total purchase and sale accounts for agricultural products supplied in 1999 and 200 as a result of the Plaintiff’s entrustment of the sale of agricultural products from farmers who are agricultural products, and provided services from wholesale market corporations, and the Plaintiff has a duty to submit to the Defendant a list of total purchase and sale accounts for agricultural products supplied in 199 and 200, KRW 30,000, KRW 6,520, KRW 90, KRW 190, KRW 900, KRW 209, KRW 309, KRW 2059, KRW 900, KRW 209, KRW 19539, KRW 209, KRW 2005.

2. Article 76 (9) 2 of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Act No. 6047, Dec. 28, 199) provides that “Where ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ is not required to submit a list of total sales and purchase accounts pursuant to Article 121 (3) within the prescribed period or all of the items to be entered are not entered in the list or entered differently from the fact” shall be imposed on the Plaintiff. Article 121 (2) of the Value-Added Tax Act provides that “The Plaintiff shall not, in the event of sales and purchase by consignment or agent of agricultural products exempt from value-added tax pursuant to Article 12 (1) 1, deliver an invoice, etc. to the Plaintiff by deeming that ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ corporation was not subject to the supply of goods by its consignee or agent.” Paragraph (3) provides that the Plaintiff’s sales and purchase account statement shall not be deemed to be issued to the Plaintiff’s 1.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.