logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2013. 10. 31. 선고 2013두20172 판결
(심리불속행) 사실과 다른 세금계산서를 수취함에 있어 원고의 선의ㆍ무과실이 인정 안됨[국승]
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit

Daegu High Court 2012Nu2864 (Law No. 16, 2013)

Case Number of the previous trial

National Tax Service Review Division 2011-0129 ( October 22, 2011)

Title

(In the case of receiving tax invoices different from the facts, the plaintiff's good faith and negligence should not be recognized.

Summary

(Summary) The Plaintiff operated a gas station for a considerable period of time, purchased oil more than ordinary prices, did not properly verify the place of business, oil storage facilities, distribution route, etc., the number of the ticket on the shipment is the same, the number of other entries is defective, and the place listed on the shipment slip is the head office which is a house for which the permission for oil storage facilities cannot be granted as the date of permission for the oil storage facilities.

Related statutes

Article 17 of the Value-Added Tax Act

Cases

2013Du20172 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

Plaintiff-Appellant

1. The Gima 2.B 3. YellowCC

Defendant-Appellee

1.2.Pool Tax Director;

Judgment of the lower court

Daegu High Court Decision 2012Nu2864 Decided August 16, 2013

Imposition of Judgment

October 31, 2013

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

As appellant did not state the grounds of appeal in the petition of appeal filed by appellant and did not submit a statement of grounds of appeal within the statutory period, Article 429 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, and Article 5 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal by the assent of all participating Justices

arrow