Seoul Administrative Court 2009Guhap18646 ( October 22, 2010)

early 208west2737 (Ob. 12, 2009)

The validity of the exclusion period and exclusion period of national tax due to processing purchase;

(The judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the judgment of the court of first instance) so long as it is recognized that the processing sales have been actually conducted by the customer, the disposition is justifiable, and the act of including the processing sales in deductible expenses at the time of the return of the value-added tax after receiving the false tax invoice constitutes fraud

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the defendant revoked the disposition of imposition of global income tax of KRW 84,263,270 for the year 202, and the amount corresponding to the year 2003 as well as KRW 218,003,970 for the year 200 (the plaintiff revoked the details and disposition of global income for the year 2001 at the trial and reduced the claim of the plaintiff).

1. Quotation of judgments of the first instance;

The reasons why a member should explain this case are as follows: (a) and (b) of Section 2-A and Section 2-D(3) of the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance are deleted; and (c) of Section 2-C are insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion under Section 2-D(2)(b) as the grounds for recognition of the court of first instance; and (b) it is identical to the grounds for the judgment of the court of first instance except for adding the description of No. 2-A to the evidence that is insufficient to recognize the plaintiff's assertion as the grounds for recognition under Section 2-C(b). Thus, it

2. Consultations

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just and it is dismissed as the plaintiff's appeal. It is so decided as per Disposition.