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

Each disposition of imposition of value-added tax of KRW 129,803,640 for the first term in 2009, KRW 91,330,90 for the second term in 2009, KRW 17,147,960 for the second term in 2010, KRW 11,607,970 for the second term in 2010, KRW 13,786,870 for the first term in 2011, KRW 9,390 for the second term in 201, KRW 6,930 for the second term in 201, KRW 15,618, and KRW 130 for the second term in 2011, KRW 9,390 for the second term in 2011, KRW 6,930 for the first term in 20, KRW 180 for the second term in 2012, KRW 15,130 for the second term in 20

A. The Plaintiff operated a large number of transportation companies including AAA transportation companies (hereinafter “AA transportation companies”) in the O area, and served as the president of the OOO transportation business association from around 2007.

B. As a result of the corporate tax investigation conducted from May 7, 2014 to August 29, 2014 with respect to AA transportation from 2009 to 2012, the Defendant determined that the Plaintiff purchased and sold the car registration number for the trucking transport business (hereinafter “instant car registration number”) and received the payment in its own account.

C. On June 27, 2014, the Defendant: (a) completed ex officio registration of the Plaintiff as an individual entrepreneur (a service: category of business; an intangible property right brokerage); (b) on October 1, 2014, the Defendant imposed the Plaintiff a disposition of KRW 129,803,640 for the first term portion in the year 2009, KRW 91,30,90 for the second term in the year 2009, KRW 17,147,960 for the first term in the year 2010, KRW 11,607, KRW 970 for the second term in the year 2010, KRW 13,786,870 for the first term in the year 2011, KRW 90, KRW 670 for the second term in the year 2011, KRW 16,390 for the second term in the year 2012; and (c) each of the instant KRW 13016,13080 for the year 201.

D. On October 2, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for review of the instant disposition with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, but was dismissed on February 3, 2015. Each description of the evidence and evidence set forth in subparagraphs 1 through 3, and Eul’s evidence set forth in subparagraphs 1 through 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

1) On January 2004, after the restriction of new permission was imposed to prevent the excessive supply of truck for business use, the demand for trucking transport companies’ automobile registration numbers increased. The Plaintiff, as the president of the OOO Transport Business Association, received the funds for purchase of automobile registration numbers from its members for the convenience of its members seeking to purchase the car registration number, and purchased the car registration number corresponding to the amount, not the Plaintiff purchased the car registration number and sold it to its members. During the process, the Plaintiff purchased the car registration number and voluntarily withdrawn the form of transferring the same to the members. However, this was only for viewing the benefits of low premium rates subject to AAA transportation.

2) Even if the Plaintiff gains profits in the course of arranging a transaction between a seller of a motor vehicle registration number and a final transferee, this is merely a brokerage and good offices for the acquisition and transfer of a motor vehicle registration number. Since the Plaintiff did not have an intention to own the instant motor vehicle registration number, it does not constitute the supply of goods premised on the transfer of ownership, and the Defendant is not allowed to impose value-added tax on the Plaintiff, which is merely the nominal owner who conducted a transaction by proxy in accordance with the principle of substantial taxation. The instant disposition based on the premise that the Plaintiff purchased and sold the instant

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Determination

In full view of the following facts and circumstances, the Plaintiff purchased the instant car registration number and sold it to the final transferee, in full view of each of the aforementioned evidence, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 5 through 11, and witness JJ’s testimony, as a whole, the following facts and circumstances may be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the purport of the entire pleadings:

(1) On January 2004, after the restriction of new permission in order to prevent excessive supply of truck for business use, the demand for the registration number of the truck transportation company has increased, accordingly.

AAAA transportation was active in the transaction of the car registration number. From around 2009 to around 2012, the car registration number of the transport business was purchased in addition to the instant car registration number and sold after being registered in the AAAA transportation name, and the value-added tax was paid for the sales.

② The Plaintiff paid a serial number plate to the seller of the instant vehicle registration number by means of an account in the Plaintiff’s name, and traded the instant vehicle registration number to the final transferee. However, the transfer and acquisition agreement was made in the name of AAA transportation operated by the Plaintiff and transferred the registration to the final transferee. The transfer and acquisition agreement was not concluded between the seller and the final transferee, and the transfer and acquisition agreement was made only between the seller and the final transferee. The transfer and acquisition agreement was made between the seller and the final transferee.

③ The Plaintiff asserts that the case of purchase and sale for the purpose of sale and the case of intermediation and brokerage of the acquisition and transfer of a motor vehicle registration number among the motor vehicle registration numbers transacted after being registered in the name of AAAA, but there is no sign to distinguish between the time and method of transaction, AAAA transportation, or the Plaintiff’s sales profits (fee) in addition to the fact that the accounts using the transaction are different. There is no difference between the legal nature of the instant transaction and the motor vehicle registration number made through the account of KimO.

④ If the Plaintiff simply arranged and arranged the acquisition and transfer of the instant vehicle registration number, the agreement between the seller and the final transferee on the purchase price and the terms and conditions of transaction should be reached. There is no evidence to confirm it, and the purchase price and terms and conditions of transaction are likely to have been reached between the Plaintiff and the final transferee and the final transferee.

⑤ Some of the instant car registration numbers were registered in the name of AAA transportation and transferred to the final buyer after a considerable period of time has elapsed. It is a type of transaction that could not have been a mere brokerage or arrangement.

(6) As alleged by the Plaintiff, vehicles newly registered in the name of AAA transportation from around 2009 to around 2012 are entitled to premium rates by purchasing a non-life insurance (group insurance) for AAA transportation, and even if the final purchaser’s transfer of a motor vehicle and conversion into the insurance of a mutual aid association, the said premium rate has been maintained even if the motor vehicle is converted into the insurance of the mutual aid association. However, this cannot be the ground that the instant motor vehicle registration number transaction was not made. However, the Plaintiff is merely deemed to have been able to make any more transactions or set the terms and conditions of the instant transaction in the status reflected in the above premium rate, and it is difficult to view that the Plaintiff had gone through a prompt procedure for transferring the motor vehicle under the name of AAA transportation without going through a simplified procedure for directly transferring the registration from the seller to the final buyer.

After purchasing the instant car registration number, the Plaintiff acquired the right to exclusively use and dispose of the instant car under the third comprehensive mining name, and again transferred the right and possession to the consumers. Even if the Plaintiff did not have an intention to do so, the Plaintiff’s act constitutes the supply of the instant car registration number, which is goods, and does not constitute a mere brokerage and good offices. The instant disposition is lawful, and the Plaintiff’s assertion on a different premise is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.