1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

From July 28, 2010, the Plaintiff operates the retail store of the trade name “Cma” in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si.

The Plaintiff received a tax invoice of KRW 53,583,773 (hereinafter “D”) total purchase price of KRW 53,583,773 (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) from D during the value-added tax period from February 2, 2012 to January 1, 2013, 12,715,954 won, KRW 28,594,836 won, total of KRW 53,530,014, total of KRW 53,583,773, from the Plaintiff during the value-added tax period from February 2, 2012 to December 1, 2014 (hereinafter “D”). Based on this, the Defendant paid a tax invoice of KRW 53,583,773 (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”). Based on this, the Defendant calculated the value-added tax after deducting the Plaintiff’s input tax amount from the Plaintiff’s output tax amount for each of the aforementioned taxable periods.

From April 2015 to May 2015, the Central Regional Tax Office: (a) determined that the instant tax invoice was a false tax invoice and notified the Defendant thereof; (b) on January 26, 2016, the Defendant issued a revised notice of value-added tax on the sum of value-added tax of KRW 1,68,820, value-added tax for the second year of 2012, value-added tax 2,251,160, value-added tax for the first year of 2013, value-added tax for the second year of 2013, value-added tax of KRW 5,11,270, value-added tax for the second year of 2013, and value-added tax of KRW 501,570 for the first year of 201,570 for the first year of 2014 (Evidence No. 1; hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On April 18, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a request for review to revoke the instant disposition with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, but the Commissioner of the National Tax Service dismissed the Plaintiff’s request on June 28, 2016.

(A) 【Evidence Nos. 2 and 3. 【Ground for Recognition】 In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 2-1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 4-1 through 4-4, the assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's assertion of judgment, jointly with the representative of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "E"), D is practically operated as the liquor wholesale company with another person.