Incheon District Court 2010Guu2405 (O1, 2011)

Cho High Court Decision 2009J 3991 (2010.05.04)

Inasmuch as the supplier of oil has passed the confirmation on the supplier of oil, it shall not be recognized as good faith or negligence.

(As in the first instance judgment, the tax invoice received constitutes a false or processed tax invoice prepared as if the oil was supplied even if the oil was not actually supplied, and it is difficult to view that the person fulfilled his duty of care as a good manager at the time of the transaction by transit, and thus, the non-deductible disposition of value-added tax is legitimate.

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

2011Nu10432 Revocation of Disposition of Imposition of Value-Added Tax

Hongx

The director of the Southern Incheon District Office

Incheon District Court Decision 2010Guhap2405 Decided February 11, 2011

October 19, 2011

November 23, 2011

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. Each disposition of the Defendant imposed value-added tax of 34,573,470 won on the Plaintiff on September 1, 2009 and value-added tax of 39,085,720 won on the first term in 206 and the first term in 2007 shall be revoked.

1. cite the judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for the judgment of this court are as follows. The corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Pursuant to the deduction of ‘the second 7th 7, the third 8th , or ‘the inclusion of necessary expenses in the gross income amount', ‘the seventh th 7th 2009' below, ‘the first 1,2,3, and 4th 3th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th th, 2009', respectively.

In addition, the plaintiff's tax invoice constitutes a false or processed tax invoice that will be the fifth one. The plaintiff's tax invoice constitutes a false or processed tax invoice different from the facts, and it cannot be viewed differently even if this court considers various circumstances and evidence.

O 5th 9th '○ Energy' and ‘The AA' are written with ‘○ Energy' and ‘the Ath 3th 9th 'the A' respectively with ‘the A 4 through 14th 'the Ath 3th 'A'.

2. Conclusion

The judgment of the first instance is justifiable. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.