logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.10.21 2015고정1673
조세범처벌법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is a person who runs a high railroad and retail business with the trade name “D” in Gangseo-gu Busan Metropolitan City from September 2010 to June 2012.

Despite the fact that no one has issued or been issued a tax invoice without supplying goods or services under the Value-Added Tax Act, the Defendant was issued a tax invoice in the said D office on September 30, 201, including the fact that, although having not been supplied with goods or services from E, the Defendant was issued a tax invoice as if he had been supplied with goods equivalent to KRW 66,496,100 of the value of supply; and the tax invoice equivalent to KRW 297,797,800 of the value of supply from E on October 31, 201; and the tax invoice equivalent to KRW 202,107,000 of the value of supply from November 30, 201; and the tax invoice equivalent to KRW 207,145,000 of the value of supply from December 15, 201.

Accordingly, the Defendant received four tax invoices of the total supply value of KRW 773,545,90 from E in total four times.

2. According to the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, the Defendant received four copies of the purchase tax invoices of KRW 773,545,900 in total from E during the 2nd VAT taxable period in 2011, and reported the value-added tax by deducting the above input tax amount, and the fact that the head of the Kim Sea Tax Office investigated the E representativeF in transaction order and then accused F as data.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the record, namely, ① the Defendant remitted the total amount of the supply value and tax from the Defendant’s bank account to the G account designated by F, an E operator, from September 201 to February 2012; ② the Defendant issued a measurement certificate each time it receives scrap metal from E; ③ the date of issuance of each measurement certificate and the details recorded by the Defendant in the book are most consistent; ③ the Changwon District Prosecutors’ Office issued a false tax invoice on June 5, 201 in 2011.

arrow