Daejeon District Court 201Guhap1575 ( December 07, 2011)

Cho High Court Decision 2010Na3417 ( October 07, 2011)

Since it was neglected to verify despite the receipt of a defective shipment mark, it cannot be recognized as good faith or negligence.

(The judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the judgment of the court of first instance) of the Plaintiff’s shipment slips that the time of issuance is written on a daily basis, as well as the temperature, weight, and density are very poor compared to the general shipment slips, and thus, the Plaintiff’s negligence of confirmation cannot be recognized as good faith and without fault.

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

2012Nu179 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

XX

Head of Hongsung Tax Office

Daejeon District Court Decision 201Guhap1575 Decided December 7, 2011

May 3, 2012

May 31, 2012

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, and the defendant revoked the disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 000 on July 5, 2010 against the plaintiff on July 5, 201.

The reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) the reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as stated in Section 3, 6, and 7 of Section 5, Section 8, Section 6 of Section 5, Section 7, Section 6 of Section 7, except for addition of Section 9, Section 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Section 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and Section 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.