Whether the information materials constitute evidentiary materials of the disposition of imposition

Information materials with circumstances to recognize credibility can be deemed as evidence, and national tax imposition disposition based on such information materials does not violate the underlying taxation principle and the prohibition of unfair infringement of property rights.

Article 16 of the Framework Act on National Taxes

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Cheong-gu Office

The defendant revoked each disposition of imposition of value-added tax for the first term of 200 for the plaintiff on June 16, 2005, 291,041,620 for the first term of 200, 54,248,030 for the second term value-added tax for the second term of 200, 307,244,210 for the first term of 2001, 367,034,40 for the second term value-added tax for the second term of 2001, 259,560 for the second term of 202, and 197,392,220 for the corporate tax for the second term of 200, 45,131,420 for the corporate tax for the year 201, 38,620 for the corporate tax for the year 38,620 for the year 202.

1. Circumstances of dispositions;

A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that sells computers, peripheral devices, etc. to the relevant companies of ○○ City and △△ also in the wholesale and retail form.

B. On Aug. 16, 2004, the director of the regional tax office of 004 received the information of this case (hereinafter referred to as the "information of this case") such as ‘the balance sheet/purchase sales by company' (hereinafter referred to as ‘the balance list by company'), which is a material about the plaintiff's tax evasion from sexual ○○○ who had worked as the director in charge of the plaintiff's accounting; 'the balance list by company' (hereinafter referred to as ‘the balance list by company')'; 'the current status of monthly sales/interest by company' (hereinafter referred to as ‘the above information of this case') and conducted a tax investigation as to the appropriateness of the return amount of corporate tax and value-added tax from August 16, 2004 to December 7, 2004.

C. As a result of the above tax investigation, the director of ○○ Regional Tax Office reported the Plaintiff’s sales amount of KRW 80,605,843,345 or KRW 74,591,196,089 (including the part corrected and imposed prior to the instant case) during the pertinent taxable period, and omitted the sales amount of KRW 6,014,647,256, and at the same time failed to pay the sales amount of KRW 6,860,32,336 to the sales amount, and notified the Defendant of the result of the above tax investigation.

D. According to the above notification, the defendant included the amount of omission of sales, omission of purchase, and excess amount of credit purchase in gross income and deductible expenses when calculating the income amount of each business year, or included the amount of omission of sales in deductible expenses in deductible expenses, and made a disposition to correct and impose each corporate tax and value-added tax stated in the plaintiff's claim on June 16, 2005 (hereinafter "each disposition of this case").

E. On September 9, 2005, the Plaintiff appealed to the National Tax Tribunal on each of the dispositions of this case, but was dismissed on September 21, 2006.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without any dispute, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1-1 to 4, Eul evidence 2-1 to 5, Eul evidence 4-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Each of the dispositions of this case depends only on the information data of this case that was prepared and submitted by sexual ○○ without the actual investigation of the customer confirmation investigation or deposit and withdrawal, etc., is in violation of the basic taxation principle and the prohibition of unfair infringement of property rights, which are the major principles of tax law, and is unlawful and unfair.

B. Relevant statutes

Basic Act

Article 16 (Ground Taxation)

(1) If any person liable for tax payment keeps and enters a book under tax-related Acts, the investigation and determination of the tax base of the national tax shall be based on the book kept and entered and related documentary evidence.

(2) In investigating and assessing national taxes under paragraph (1), if the contents of the entry are different from facts or are omitted from the entry, only such part may be determined in accordance with the facts examined by the Government.

Article 18 (Standard for Tax-Related Acts Interpretation and Prohibition of Retroactive Taxation)

(1) In interpreting and applying tax-related Acts, property rights of taxpayers shall not be unfairly infringed on in light of the equity in taxation and purpose of the relevant provisions.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) The Plaintiff filed a report on corporate tax and value-added tax for each business year with a total of KRW 75,509,137,579, and a total of KRW 72,813,437,306 for each business year from 2000 to 202. However, as a result of the investigation conducted by the head of △△ District Tax Office on a suspicion of data around November 2003, the Plaintiff found the Plaintiff as a total of KRW 917,941,490 and the total of KRW 483,954,00,000, and notified the Defendant of the omission of purchase, reflecting the above investigation results, the Defendant imposed corporate tax and value-added tax for the period from 200 to 202, and again corrected each of the above dispositions to the Plaintiff by reflecting the results of the tax investigation conducted by the Director of ○○ District Tax Office on June 16, 2005.

(2) The sexual ○○ and the Plaintiff, which had been the director of the Plaintiff’s accounting division, were prosecuted for committing the crime that ○○○, an employee of the Plaintiff, issued false tax invoices equivalent to KRW 7,976,161,642 on a total of 667 occasions from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2002. At the first instance trial on July 21, 2005, sexual ○○ was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for 10 months, the Plaintiff was sentenced to a fine of 40 million won, and on October 19, 2005, sexual ○○ was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 10 months and 80 hours, and the Plaintiff was sentenced to a fine of 30 million won, and the above appellate judgment became final and conclusive at that time.

(3) The instant information data is prepared by the program produced by the Kim Jong-chul chief, who had been in charge of the Plaintiff’s computer affairs, using the external computer program. From September 200 to April 2003, 2003, the head of the accounting division of the Plaintiff company retired from his office, and the Plaintiff’s sales details, etc. entered in the said program upon request from the above Kim Jong-soo, were printed out by electronic means. In addition to the instant information data, there is no accounting book that can identify the sales details, etc. from 200 to 2002 in addition to the instant information data.

(4) The balance sheet by company among the information data of this case is prepared in a manner that makes it easy for each customer to manage them, and the full-time balance, purchase, sales, receipts, payments, and current balance by customer are recorded in detail. In particular, the balance sheet by company in 2000 is written in addition to the above contents and the name of the sales officer.

(5)The monthly sales/interest status among the instant information materials are prepared by classifying them by store each month, stating the sales amount and various expenses for each store, the current status of profit by store and the expected amount of profit distribution therefrom also in detail. The said materials are signed by the employee in charge, and some of the materials are also written with the signature of the △△△△△ Director.

(6) On January 26, 2005, the Plaintiff notified the director of ○○ Regional Tax Office of the result of a tax investigation, and filed a request for pre-assessment review with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service. On April 2005, the Commissioner of ○○ Regional Tax Office rendered a decision that it is reasonable to conduct a re-audit, as it is insufficient to conduct a tax investigation on the status of payment for suspected omission of sales and specific facts related to transaction details by transaction partner when utilizing the information data of this case as materials for taxation basis. Accordingly, the director of ○○ Regional Tax Office made a re-audit from April 25, 2005 to May 20.

The director of the regional tax office at the time of reinvestigationd the Plaintiff’s transaction amount is relatively high among the Plaintiff’s trading companies, and the business partner verification investigation was conducted on sample with six companies located in Busan, and the above two companies (○com, Co., Ltd.) denied the omission by asserting that there was no memory of transaction other than the tax invoice. However, the remaining four companies (○○ system, △△△, △△ Computer, and △△ Computer) were in accord with the fact that the transaction status stated in the instant information data is consistent with the fact, and there was time for their purchase omission. In particular, it was confirmed that the said two companies (○○ system, ○○ Company, △△△△), compared directly with the transaction account books of the above companies, the details of the transaction are almost identical with the details stated in the instant information data. In accordance with the results of the re-audit, it was determined that the details of the initial tax investigation were justifiable.

(7) Meanwhile, in the event that the Plaintiff calculates the Plaintiff’s revenue based on the Plaintiff’s credit card use details and the result of the on-site verification investigation of the customer, the amount of revenue in 2001 exceeds the amount of revenue calculated based on each of the instant information data as KRW 19,677,726,495 (Provided, That the amount of revenue in 200 cannot be calculated by investigating the use of credit cards as above, on the grounds that the card company did not keep the data on transactions in 200).

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 5, 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4-2, Eul evidence Nos. 5 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 10 through 15 (including each number), Eul evidence Nos. 17, Eul evidence Nos. 18-1 through 5, Eul Nos. 21, 28-28, Eul evidence Nos. 29-1, 29-2, each of the statements in this court's ○ Card Co.,, Ltd., ○○ Card Co.,, Ltd., △△○○ Card Co.,, Ltd., △△△○ Card Co.,, Ltd., Ltd., △△△△○ Bank, △○ Card Co.,,, Ltd., and △○ Card Co.,, Ltd., the whole purport of arguments, as a result of

D. Determination

The key issue of this case is whether the credibility of the Plaintiff’s information of this case can be acknowledged by ○○○○○○○○ Business Operator’s 6 business entity’s disposal based on the following circumstances, namely, ① the information of this case was prepared not directly by ○○, but by electronically printing out the contents of the Plaintiff’s program used by △○, other than the information of this case’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 0 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 6 business entity’s 20-year 20 business entity’s 20 business entity’s 20 business entity’s 20 business entity’s 20.

Therefore, each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate, not contrary to the underlying taxation principles and the prohibition of unjust infringement of property rights.

3. Conclusion

Then, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.