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

On December 4, 2012, the Plaintiff completed business registration of the Housing Construction and Sales Business jointly with B on December 4, 2012. On December 13, 2012, the Plaintiff started the construction of 12 households of urban-type C ground residential housing (hereinafter “instant multi-family housing”) and started the construction on June 14, 2013, which was approved for use on June 14, 2013.

On the premise that the Plaintiff, in 2012, sold by-products of the previous building in the taxable period immediately preceding 2013, the sales of the instant multi-family housing and obtained the amount below the amount provided for in Article 143(4)2(b) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26982, Feb. 17, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply), the Plaintiff calculated the estimated income by filing a global income tax return for the global income tax for the year 2013 by applying the simple expense rate, and filed a comprehensive income tax return and payment by applying the special tax reduction and exemption for the construction business.

As a result of the income tax investigation on the plaintiff, the head of the Seoul Regional Tax Office deemed 2013 years from the date of commencement of the business, and the plaintiff constitutes a new business operator, not a business operator who has run the existing business on the basis of each relevant taxable period. Since the amount of revenue exceeds the standard amount under Articles 143 (3) 1 and 208 (5) 2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, the amount of income should be estimated by applying standard expense rate rather than simple expense rate, and the plaintiff cannot be deemed to have run a construction business, and thus, the head of the Seoul Regional Tax Office notified the defendant that Article 7 (1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 12173, Jan. 1, 2014; hereinafter the "former Restriction of Special Taxation Act") should be excluded from the application of the special reduction

Accordingly, the defendant on 2017.