Whether a tax invoice received from data constitutes a processed tax invoice

Since a tax invoice received from data cannot be deemed to have been falsely prepared without real transactions, it is unreasonable to impose tax on the processed tax invoice in this case, because it is difficult to deem that the other party to the payment was proved to have proved to the extent that it is false.

Article 19 (Scope of Deductible Expenses)

Tax amount paid under Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of KRW 45,018,230 on December 1, 2005 against the Plaintiff on December 1, 2005 and KRW 87,914,130 on corporate tax of 202 shall be revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Details of each disposition of this case;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that has engaged in data processing and other computer operation-related business in ○○ City, ○○○○○, and filed a return of the value-added tax for the second term of 2002 and the corporate tax for 2002 business year, after deducting the input tax amount of 10 copies of the purchase tax invoice as follows (hereinafter “the tax invoice of this case”) issued by Nonparty ○ Information Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Non-Party”) and included the value of supply in the deductible expenses.

Details of the tax invoice of this case

Date of transaction

Value of Supply

Amount of tax

Total

October 7, 2002

31,652,00 won

3,165,200 won

34,817,200 won

October 21, 2002

23,807,00 won

2,380,700 won

26,187,700 won

October 31, 2002

9,640,000 won

964,000 won

10,604,00 won

November 4, 2002

10,341,00 won

1,034,100 won

1,375,100 won

November 8, 2002

38,163,300 won

3,816,330 won

41,979,630 won

November 15, 2002

18,435,00 won

1,843,500 won

20,278,500 won

November 26, 2002

36,102,00 won

3,610,200 won

39,712,200 won

December 10, 2002

16,040,000 won

1,604,00 won

17,644,00 won

December 17, 2002

28,482,00 won

2,848,200 won

31,330,200 won

December 31, 2002

34,623,00 won

3,462,300 won

38,085,300 won

Total

247,285,300 won

24,728,530 won

272,013,830 won

B. However, around October 2004, the Defendant received notification from the head of ○○ Tax Office having jurisdiction over the non-party company that the non-party company was accused of it on the data. Accordingly, on December 1, 2005, the Defendant decided not to deduct all the input tax amount under the tax invoice of this case on the ground that all the tax invoices of this case were received without actual transaction, and corrected and notified the Plaintiff of the amount of value-added tax 45,018,230 for the second period of December 1, 2002, and on the same ground, the Defendant decided not to exclude the supply value of the tax invoice of this case from deductible expenses, and corrected and notified the Plaintiff of the amount of KRW 87,914,130 for corporate tax of 202 (hereinafter “each disposition of this case”).

(In fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 11-2, and Eul evidence 1-2, each entry

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff actually purchased computer hardware and parts as stated in the tax invoice of this case from the non-party company and paid the price in cash. The defendant's taxation disposition of this case that concluded that all of the tax invoice of this case is false on the ground that the non-party company is suspected of being data.

(b) Related statutes;

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Determination

(1) In a lawsuit seeking the revocation of a tax imposition disposition, the burden of proving the existence of a tax requirement fact is on the tax authority. Therefore, in principle, the tax authority is responsible for proving that a tax invoice is false; however, it is proved that a tax invoice reported by a taxpayer was prepared without real transactions by the defendant, who is the tax authority, and thus, whether it is an actual cost. If the taxpayer's purpose of use of the cost claimed by the taxpayer and the other party to the payment have been proved to a considerable extent that it is false, it is necessary to prove that it is easy for the taxpayer to present data, such as books and evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions ○○○○○○○○, supra, and ○○○○○○○, supra, on ○○, on 1997).

(2) However, according to each of the evidence Nos. 3-1 through 4, 4, 8, and 11 as to whether the instant tax invoice is false or not, it is acknowledged that ○○, a substantial operator of the non-party company, received a false tax invoice from the non-party company even though he had not actually purchased goods from the non-party company, by the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over the ○○○○ Office of the ○○○ District Public Prosecutor’s Office on January 9, 2006, for the period from December 6, 2001 to December 31, 2003.

(3) Furthermore, the Plaintiff’s tax invoice was included in the above facts of accusation or ○○○○○○○○ 2. The Plaintiff’s tax invoice was issued 1 to 3, 9-1 to 4, 10-2, 12-1 to 4, 18, and 70-10 of the total pleadings as to whether it was the company that issued only the processed tax invoice 20. The Plaintiff’s 20-1 to 70-10 of the total tax invoice 1 to 60-10 of the total amount of 70-6 of the instant tax invoice, and the Plaintiff’s 20-1 to 70-2 of the instant tax invoice issued 70-6 of the instant tax invoice, and the amount of 10-1 to 70-6 of the instant tax invoice 20-6 of the instant tax invoice was 60-1 to 30-108 of the instant tax invoice, and the Plaintiff’s savings account was issued 1 to 2010-130.2 of the instant tax invoice.

3. Conclusion

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

[Supreme Court Decision 2008Du266 (No. 10, 2008)]

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant.

The records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined. However, the grounds of appeal by the appellant are not included in the grounds provided for in each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent

public official law, order of law,

Value-Added Tax Act

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

(1) The amount of value-added taxes payable by an entrepreneur (hereinafter referred to as "paid tax amount") shall be the amount computed by deducting the tax amount under the following subparagraphs (hereinafter referred to as "purchase tax amount") from the tax amount on the goods and services supplied by him/her (hereinafter referred to as "sales tax amount"): Provided, That where an input tax amount exceeds the output tax amount, it shall be a refundable tax amount (hereinafter referred to

1. The tax amount on the supply of goods or services used or to be used for his own business;

2. The tax amount for the import of goods used or to be used for his own business; and

(2) The following input taxes shall not be deducted from the output tax amount:

1. An input tax amount in case where the list of the total tax invoice by customer is not submitted under Article 20 (1) and (2), or the input tax amount on the portion not entered or entered differently from the fact, in case where the whole or part of the registration numbers or supply values by transaction parties in the submitted list of the total tax invoice by customer is not entered or entered differently from the fact, excluding the input tax amount in such

1-2. An input tax amount, in case where the tax invoice as provided in Article 16 (1) and (3) is not delivered, or the whole or part of the matters to be entered under Article 16 (1) 1 through 4 (hereinafter referred to as a “necessary entry item”) is not entered or entered differently from the fact on the delivered tax invoice: Provided, That the input tax amount in such case as prescribed by the Presidential Decree shall be

Basic Act

Article 14 (Real Taxation)

(1) If the ownership of the income, profit, property, act or transaction subject to taxation is merely nominal, and a person to whom it actually belongs exists, the tax-related Acts shall apply to such person to whom it actually belongs as a taxpayer.

(2) The provisions on the calculation of tax base in tax-related Acts shall apply according to the substance, notwithstanding the name or form of income, profit, property, act or transaction.

Corporate Tax Act

Article 19 (Scope of Deductible Expenses)

(1) Deductible expenses shall be the amount of losses incurred by transactions which reduce the net assets of a corporation, excluding return of capital or financing, disposition of surplus funds, and what is provided for in this Act.

(2) The losses under the provisions of paragraph (1) shall be losses or expenses generated or spent in connection with the business of a corporation which are generally accepted as normal or directly related to profit, except as otherwise prescribed by this Act and other Acts and subordinate statutes.

(3) Matters necessary for the scope and types of losses under the provisions of paragraphs (1) and (2) shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree.

Enforcement Decree of the former Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17826 of Dec. 30, 2002)

Except as otherwise provided for in the Act and this Decree, the losses under the provisions of Article 19 (1) of the Act shall be those as provided for in the following subparagraphs:

1. The purchase value of raw materials of commodities or manufactured goods sold (not including purchase overcharge amounts and purchase discount amounts under corporate accounting standards) and incidental expenses;

2. The book value at the time of transfer of transferred assets;

3. Personnel expenses;

4. Repair expenses for fixed assets.