2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.

Until December 2009, the Plaintiff operated a business selling landscaping trees with the trade name “B”.

The plaintiff is in arrears with national taxes and additional dues of KRW 1,213,376,120 as follows.

On December 31, 2009, the first tax base of the district tax office (including additional dues) 1, the first tax base of December 31, 2009, the second tax base of KRW 71,249,020, the second tax base of global income tax of KRW 164,205,520 on December 31, 2009, the second tax base of KRW 3,44,560,110 on global income tax of KRW 44,560,110 on December 31, 209, and the first tax base of KRW 520,124,650 on global income tax of KRW 50,50 on December 31, 2009, the first tax base of KRW 13,236,820 on global income tax of KRW 1,213,376,120 on December 31, 2013, the Defendant prohibited the Plaintiff from 130,214,20134.

On October 7, 2013, the Defendant extended the period of prohibition of departure until May 23, 2014, extended the period of prohibition of departure on April 11, 2014 by November 23, 2014, and extended the period of prohibition of departure on November 19, 2014 by May 23, 2015.

(The purport of the disposition of this case is to prevent the Plaintiff from having difficulty in compulsory execution, such as having a delinquent taxpayer escape from Korea to a foreign country by departing from Korea. The purport of the disposition of this case is to prevent the Plaintiff from having a delinquent taxpayer escape property overseas.

After imposing the tax in 2009, the Plaintiff voluntarily paid the tax exceeding KRW 170 million by 201,000. The National Tax Service had already seized the Plaintiff’s entire property and sold it by public auction, and the Plaintiff has no property to escape abroad.

Nevertheless, the defendant's prohibition of departure against the plaintiff is against excessive prohibition and is illegal.

It shall be as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

In fact, the circumstances concerning the plaintiff's property are examined.