Incheon District Court 2012Guhap6074 (2013.05.30)

National High Court Decision 2012J 3127 (Law No. 209.20)

It is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff is merely a representative in the name of the Plaintiff and there is no evidence to admit.

(1) The tax invoice of this case falls under the processing tax invoice issued without actual transactions, and it is difficult to recognize that the plaintiff did not exercise the substantial power of representation because it is merely the representative of BB Construction, and there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

Article 106 of the Enforcement Decree of the former Corporate Tax Act / [Disposition of Income]

2013Nu18010 global income and revocation of disposition

KoreaA

the director of the tax office of Western

Incheon District Court Decision 2012Guhap6074 Decided May 30, 2013

April 3, 2014

May 1, 2014

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's imposition of global income tax for the plaintiff on December 5, 201 and global income tax for the year 2007 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

This court's reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the first instance court's judgment, except for the entries in the evidence Nos. 2 through 7, 9, and 10 of the first instance judgment No. 5, and the testimony of the witness Nos. 2 through 7, 9, and 10 of the second instance judgment No. 5, and the testimony of the witness No. 2 through 7, 9, and 10 of the first instance court’s witness No. B of the first instance court, and the witness No. 5 of the appellate court's witness CC.

2. Conclusion

Since the judgment of the first instance is justifiable, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is groundless.