If the date on which the tax invoice is prepared enters differently from the actual transaction date, whether the input tax amount shall be deducted (affirmative)

Since a tax invoice is a documentary evidence to determine value-added tax and its issuance and delivery are to guarantee the truth of the documentary evidence at the time of transaction, even if it is prepared and delivered on the date that does not comply with the provisions of the Value-Added Tax Act or the Enforcement Decree thereof, if the facts of transaction are confirmed by the entries of the tax invoice, the input tax amount of the value-added tax should be deducted.

Articles 16(1), 17(2), Article 54 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act

Sung Electric Co., Ltd.

Head of Sungbuk Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 89Gu2310 decided July 18, 1989

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

As to the ground of appeal by Defendant Litigation Performers

The court below determined that the transaction of the tax invoice for the first period and second period after the date of the preparation of the tax invoice for the year 1987, which the plaintiff received from five enterprises, including the non-party South & North Traffic Co., Ltd., should be deducted from the input tax amount of the value-added tax, even if it is prepared and delivered on the date that it does not comply with the provisions of the Value-Added Tax Act or the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, and that the transaction of the tax invoice for the second period after the date of the actual transaction is true and confirmed by the entries of the other items. The above tax invoice is contrary to Article 16 (1) of the Value-Added Tax Act or Article 54 of the Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act, but the tax invoice is an evidential document to determine the value-added tax amount and it is ultimately to ensure the truth of the documentary evidence. The above opinion of the court below is just and there is no violation

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)