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

A. On March 4, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) sold the purchase price to M; (b) on July 24, 2009, “B sold D766 square meters, E 740 square meters, 726 square meters, G567 square meters, G74 square meters, J 744 square meters, J 387 square meters, K 394 square meters, L 1,108 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) to M; (c) on the part of the Defendant, the Plaintiff evaded capital gains tax by calculating the purchase price as KRW 50 million per square year, and the agricultural and fishery area as KRW 200,000 per square year; and (d) evading capital gains tax by reporting the reduction of the purchase price.

B. From June 18, 2014 to July 22, 2014, the Defendant conducted a personal business investigation with respect to B, and found the fact that B filed a report after reducing the transaction value of the instant land, and notified the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over B’s domicile, and notified B of the taxation data. Based on the result, the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over B’s domicile, the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over the global income tax for 29,461,190 won (i.e., the principal tax amount of KRW 19,009,009, KRW 191, KRW 10,452,00) and the global income tax for 20,643,506 (= principal tax of KRW 28,145,238, KRW 12,498,268) were corrected and notified, respectively.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant corrected and notified tax amount” in total. (c)

After that, on August 26, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for the payment of monetary rewards following the reporting of tax evasion. However, on October 5, 2016, the Defendant applied for the payment of monetary rewards to the Plaintiff under Article 84-2(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 14382, Dec. 20, 2016); Article 65-4(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes; Article 4(3) of the former Regulations on the Payment of Monetary Rewards for Tax Evasion (amended by the National Tax Service Directive No. 2186, Feb. 28, 2017; hereinafter the “Payment Provisions”), on the ground that the principal tax amount of the omitted tax should be at least KRW 50 million, and in the case of B, the Plaintiff failed to meet the requirements for the payment of monetary rewards.”