beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Seoul Administrative Court 201Guhap17738 ( November 16, 2011)
Case Number of the previous trial
Seocho 2010Sho 2090 ( October 08, 2011)
Title
Since there is no endorsement by the buyer on the household check that he paid the purchase price, it is not possible to recognize the actual transaction.
Summary
Of 25 copies of household checks paid to the purchasing agency, the name and seal imprint of the purchasing agency are only one head, and a large number of household checks shall be deemed as a single endorsement from another purchasing agency and shall be deemed as a false tax invoice in light of the fact that it has been endorsed by the plaintiff in another purchasing agency.
Related statutes
Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act
Cases
2011Nu42217 Revocation of value-added tax
Plaintiff and appellant
The AA
Defendant, Appellant
Head of the tax office;
Judgment of the first instance court
Seoul Administrative Court Decision 201Guhap17738 decided November 16, 2011
Conclusion of Pleadings
August 29, 2012
Imposition of Judgment
September 26, 2012
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The value-added tax of October 1, 2005 that the Defendant rendered to the Plaintiff on October 1, 2009
The imposition of KRW 000 (including additional duties) shall be revoked.
Reasons
1. cite the judgment of the first instance;
The reasoning of this court's ruling is as follows. The relevant part of the court's ruling shall be cited in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
O Decision 100 won (including additional tax) that will be 000 won that will be 7th below the second judgment of the first instance court.
O Judgment 3 of the first instance court is based on each description of Eul evidence 6-1 to 3 Eul, and Eul evidence 7-12 (including the provisional number).
O The evidence No. 13 to No. 13 is added to the evidence No. 13 and the evidence No. 14 through No. 17, which will be reduced to 11th judgment of the first instance court.
2. Conclusion
The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.