Since the main product is a precious metal product, the purchase tax invoice now is processed.

The purchaser has been accused of and sentenced to conviction on the data, and the plaintiff's credit card sales unit price of the credit card is 170,000 won average of the main sales item, not the present, but the precious metal product, so the argument that the purchaser purchased the current is not trustable, so the initial disposition that deducts input tax

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

Article 17 (Payable Tax Amount)

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of global income tax of 2,52,950 won in 2001 against the Plaintiff on April 1, 2007, of 74,332,200 won in 202, of 68,677,600 won in 2003, of 11,522,910 won in 2004, of 1,328,370 won in 201, of 2002, of 20,131,510 won in 202, of 20,574,340 won in 202, of 11,60,030, of 157,100,030 won in 203, of 11,57,100,000 won in 203, of 206, of 206 won in 206, respectively.

1. Circumstances of the disposition;

A. From February 20, 199, the Plaintiff, a business operator operating gold and retail business with the trade name of ○○○ Dong 466 to 466, Mading, a business operator, who was engaged in gold and retail business. From February 20, 1999 to 2001, 200 and 1, 2004, two gold Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “a pair of gold”) received each purchase tax invoice 168 (hereinafter referred to as “the tax invoice in this case”) equivalent to the total value of supply as stated in the Schedule, as stated in the Schedule, 336,681,636 won, as the purchase tax invoice in this case, deducted the input tax amount on the tax invoice in this case from the output tax amount in the related taxable period, and filed an application for value-added tax and global

B. However, the Defendant: (a) on April 1, 2007, issued a tax invoice of this case to the Plaintiff on the grounds that the Plaintiff was a two-way data; (b) deducted input tax amount on the instant tax invoice; and (c) corrected value-added tax and comprehensive income tax by excluding the purchase amount from necessary expenses; (b) on April 1, 2001, global income tax of 2,582,950 won; (c) KRW 74,32,200 in the year 202; (d) KRW 69,348,450 in the year 2003; (d) KRW 11,52,910 in the year 204; and (e) KRW 1,328,370 in the year 201; and (e) KRW 20,131,510 in the year 202; and (e) KRW 2034,301 in the year 200; and KRW 3613636,2030.

C. After that, on September 17, 2008, the defendant issued a tax invoice for the supply price of KRW 1,403,998, which was issued for the second period of 2003, among the tax invoices for which the purchase amount was non-deductible and the purchase amount was not included in the necessary expenses, and confirmed that there was no fact that the plaintiff deducted the purchase amount from the input tax amount or included the purchase amount in the necessary expenses. The defendant decided to reduce the total income tax of KRW 68,67,600, and the value-added tax of KRW 11,597,100 for the second period of 2003 (hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of imposition of global income tax and value-added tax for the second year of 203 and the second year of 203") by each of the above global income tax and value-added tax for the second period of 203" (hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of this case").

D. On May 17, 2007, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a request for examination with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, but on September 20, 2007, the Commissioner of the National Tax Service dismissed the said request for examination.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 9, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the dispositions of the instant case are legal.

A. The plaintiff's principal

Even if the two-year transaction was based on the data, the entire transaction is not a processing transaction, but a part of the transaction is a real transaction. The actual financial transaction according to the tax invoice of this case issued by the plaintiff exists and some transaction was paid directly in cash, but it cannot be viewed as an exceptional in view of the actual transaction situation of gold bullion. Although the tax invoice of this case was stated by Kim Ho-ho, the actual representative of the tax invoice of this case, as a result of the processing transaction, it is difficult to believe that the tax invoice of this case was made under detention and that the actual statement was made with the truth while accurately distinguishing the transaction details of this case before several years, it is difficult to believe that some of the tax invoice of this case issued by the plaintiff was prepared and submitted a confirmation that the transaction was based on the actual transaction. Thus, the disposition of this case on the premise that all the transaction transactions in the tax invoice of this case were a processing transaction is unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It shall be as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) On January 16, 2001, ○○○ established a pair of gold and operated it until July 2, 2002. Kim○-soo was the representative director from July 2, 2002 to June 5, 2004, who was the cessation of business.

(2) As a result of the Seoul Regional Tax Office’s investigation on the suspicions of two hundreds of material, the amount of two hundreds of material and the sales reported during the taxable period from January 2001 to January 2004 and the amount of purchase, which were revealed by processing sales and processing purchases, were determined as material and filed an accusation against the prosecutor, and the Defendant, etc. notified the processed transaction details, including the instant tax invoice, to the taxation data.

(3) On November 2, 2004, Kim ○ recognized that the instant tax invoice prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff was due to a processing transaction without real transactions after receiving an investigation from a tax official belonging to the Seoul Regional Tax Office related to the charge of material facts.

(4) The first instance court, who was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years in Seoul Western District Court 2004Dahap204, 385 (Joint) and sentenced to three years in total, 2004Dahap368, 2005Kahap2, 42, 49 (Joint), was sentenced to three years in total, and was sentenced to three years in Seoul Western District Court 2006No62 (Separate Division) and sentenced to three years in total and five billion won in total, which was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for three years in Seoul Western District Court 2006No62 (Separate Division) and a fine of five hundred million won in total.

(5) On the other hand, through the above criminal case, two gold was used to prepare and deliver a false tax invoice to the processing company, and to disguised the actual sale as if it was actually made. In order to deposit the sales price in the name of the above sales office at the closing point of the Industrial Bank of Korea, which is its employee, into the above sales office's account, or collect and return the fees after receiving the deposit from the processing trading office. As between July 25, 2002 and July 28, 2003, it was confirmed that the two accounts were deposited in the bank's account by proxy in the name of the plaintiff's 12,406,000 won in total in the deposit account from July 25, 2002 to July 28, 2003.

(6) The Plaintiff submitted the details of transactions transferred from the Plaintiff’s bank account to the bank account at a time similar to the date on which the instant tax invoice was prepared, or by Internet banking and phone banking, etc.

(7) Transportation chain Co., Ltd.: (a) ○○○○○ System, Posting Day was operated by the Plaintiff and between s○○ Chain chain in Seoul and s○○ Store in precious metal wholesale business. ○○○○○○ System, which is an enterprise located in 18km or 14k finished product, manufacturing or wholesaleing precious metal. The Plaintiff transported precious metal through the said wing Company, upon ordering precious metal, by requesting the Plaintiff to send a rewing box to s○ chain; (b) ○○○○ System, small amount of ○○○ System, ○○○○ System, ○○○○ System, ○○○○ System, ○○○○ System, ○○○○○ System, ○○○○○ System, ○○○○○ System, and ○○○ System, etc., which is an enterprise located in s○○-gu, Seoul.

(8) In the taxable period from January 2002 to January 2004, the Plaintiff’s sales took place most of the credit card payments as seen below, and the purchase price per case is merely KRW 170,000, and thus, most of the sales of finished products of 18km and 14k finished products is considered as sales of precious metals. The Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff’s business establishment purchased precious metal finished products, not now, at the Plaintiff’s place of business after checking that the payment amount is at least KRW 1,00,000, out of the credit card transactions during the taxable period.

[Reasons for Recognition] The aforementioned evidence, evidence Nos. 4-143, 144, Gap evidence No. 6, Eul evidence Nos. 6, 7, 8, 11 through 16, and the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

(1) The burden of proving that the tax invoice is false, in principle, to the defendant who is the tax authority. As such, the defendant must prove that the tax invoice is not accompanied by real transactions on the basis of direct evidence or all the circumstances. In a case where the defendant proves considerable degree of proof as to this point to the extent reasonably acceptable, it is necessary to prove that the tax invoice is not false and that it is easy to present evidence and materials related to the plaintiff who is the taxpayer requesting the illegality of the defendant's disposition. In addition, in the administrative trial, even if the tax invoice is not bound by the fact-finding in the criminal trial, the fact that it is recognized as a crime of criminal judgment which has already become final and conclusive in relation to the same fact-finding constitutes a flexible evidence, and thus, it cannot be recognized that the tax invoice is contrary to this, unless there are any special circumstances where it is difficult to employ a criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the administrative trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 97Da24276, Sep. 30, 1997; 20Du484, 1999).

(2) In regard to the instant case, as seen in the above facts, the two funds that were prepared and issued the instant tax invoice were determined on the data, and the sentence of sentence or suspension of execution was finalized for conviction or for committing an offense, etc. that was prepared and issued with false sales tax invoices, including the instant tax invoice, by Cho Jong-soo, a real operator of both funds, and Kim Jong-ho, and the Seoul Regional Tax Office confirmed that the instant tax invoice issued by Kim Jong-ho, which was issued by the Plaintiff, was false processed data. In light of the above facts, the Defendant, who is the tax authority, has proved that the Plaintiff, as the Plaintiff, had proved that the instant tax invoice delivered by the Plaintiff, was falsely prepared without real transactions. Accordingly, it is necessary to prove that there was a real transaction equivalent to the supply price of the instant tax invoice.

(3) The fact that ○○○○ Bank issued the instant tax invoice without real transaction to the Plaintiff is already determined as a conviction of the relevant criminal case. On the other hand, the Plaintiff’s statement No. 4-5, which corresponds to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant tax invoice was prepared pursuant to actual transaction, is contrary to the criminal facts of the final judgment, and it is difficult to believe that Kim Ho-ho was prepared after the final judgment. As seen in the above recognition, it was also difficult for the Plaintiff to remit the relevant price to actual transaction or to transfer the relevant price to the Plaintiff under the name of the processing trader through employees’ consent. In particular, according to the Plaintiff’s statement No. 8-1 and No. 2, it is difficult to find that the Plaintiff purchased the instant tax invoice at least 7 times from July 25, 2002 to July 28, 2003, the Plaintiff’s most of the sales volume of the instant products purchased at least 70 billion won per sales volume of the instant sales volume of the instant products from the Plaintiff’s main sales volume of the instant products.

Therefore, in light of the above circumstances, unlike the fact that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff was found guilty in the final and conclusive criminal judgment, it is reasonable to view that the tax invoice of this case was prepared in a false manner without real transactions because it is difficult to view that there was a real transaction, such as the contents stated in the tax invoice of this case, between the Plaintiff and Du○○. Therefore, the disposition of

3. Conclusion

Then, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.