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

A. The Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 500,00,000 to the Defendant, who is the head of the instant hospital, in the course of the new construction and operation of the D Hospital located in Chungcheongnam-do budget-gun, Chungcheongnam-do (hereinafter “instant hospital”), and entered into an agreement with the Defendant on September 19, 2006 on the operation of the restaurant deposit service, and the agreement on the entrusted operation of the restaurant on August 21, 2009.

B. 1) The Director of the Daejeon Regional Tax Office, upon investigating the instant hospital on August 201, 201, shall conduct a tax investigation with respect to the said hospital, and during the period from February 2, 2007 to August 201, 201, the cafeteria of the instant hospital (hereinafter “instant restaurant”).

(2) On April 6, 2012, the head of the budget office imposed a disposition of imposition on the Plaintiff for the first term portion 24,106,930 won, the second term portion 38,446,210 won, the first term portion 37,858,300 won, the second term portion 38,953,070 won, the second term portion 39,082,082,52,553,070 won, the first term portion 39,082,550 won, the second term portion 2,009, the second term portion 39,082,550 won, the second term portion 37,928,90 won, the second term portion 2,009, the second term portion 37,928,90 won, the value-added tax amount 1,41,461,416,207 won, each 2010 won.

3) On April 2, 2012, the head of Mapo District Tax Office imposed global income tax (total 49,698,400 won) on the Plaintiff in 2007, KRW 3,221,280, KRW 17,009, KRW 90 in 2008, KRW 19,898, KRW 420 in 209, KRW 9,568, and KRW 710 in 2010. The head of Mapo District Tax Office imposed global income tax on the Plaintiff on April 2, 2012, KRW 322,120 in 20, KRW 120 in 207, KRW 1,701,00 in 208, KRW 1,989, KRW 840 in 209, KRW 840 in 209, KRW 960 in 208, KRW 986, KRW 96,896 in 2010.

C. 1) Since the Plaintiff’s actual operator of the instant restaurant is the instant hospital, not the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff asserted that the imposition of each of the above value-added tax against the Plaintiff was unlawful, and filed a lawsuit against the head of the budget office ( Daejeon District Court 2012Guhap3929) seeking revocation of the said imposition of value-added tax, and the said court deemed that the Plaintiff actually operated the instant restaurant on June 28, 2013.