Seoul Administrative Court 2008Guhap34450 ( October 13, 2009)

Review Division 2008-0043 (2008.05.30)

Issuance of tax invoices for temporary agency workers

The wages of temporary agency workers shall be paid by the dispatched business operator, and even if the user company directly pays them for the convenience of payment, the dispatched business operator is obligated to identify this and issue tax invoices and report value-added tax thereon

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

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. The defendant's imposition of value-added tax of KRW 14,926,420 for the first term of July 5, 2007 against the plaintiff and the imposition of value-added tax of KRW 20,580,380 for the second term of January 23, 2008 shall be revoked.

1. Acceptance of a judgment of the court of first instance;

The court's explanation on this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance in addition to the following parts among the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, the court's explanation on this case is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The damaged part;

(a) KRW 9,800,410, KRW 100, KRW 9,800,412, KRW 13,045,720, KRW 13,045,725, KRW 8,00, KRW 56, KRW 56, KRW 56, KRW 56, KRW 56, and each revision;

(b)10 to 11 degrees of 7.10:

(6) According to the evidence adopted earlier, the Seoul Regional Tax Office appears to have identified the details and amount of the instant allowances, etc. through the relevant evidence documents, such as the payment fees of Nonparty Corporation at the time of investigating corporate tax against Nonparty Corporation, the confirmation document prepared by Nonparty Corporation, etc. As such, each of the instant dispositions cannot be deemed to have not been made by tax invoices, account books, and other evidence in violation of Article 21(2

3. Conclusion

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 so decided as per Disposition as the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.