Chuncheon District Court 2008Guhap615 ( November 12, 2008)

The reason why the name was stolen can not be viewed as a legitimate invalidation.

Whether the name was stolen or not, etc. should be clearly examined, and even if the business entity is not a business entity at the same place, the defect in the imposition of the value-added tax can not be seen as apparent, and thus cannot be viewed as void.

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.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance is revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 22,839,020 on May 1, 2003 against the plaintiff on May 1, 2003 (the plaintiff's statement on April 25, 2003) is invalid.

The reason why this court considers in this case is the same as the entry of the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, so it is accepted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and it is so decided as per Disposition by denying the plaintiff's appeal without any grounds.