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

A. On January 3, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) delegated the Defendant with the duty of reporting inheritance and gift tax upon the death of husband C; (b) the Plaintiff, as an employee of the Defendant, caused the Plaintiff to pay KRW 80,049,094 on account of the failure to report the remittance amount of KRW 500,005,893, which was from 2009 to 2011; and (c) accordingly, (d) the Defendant, as an employee of the Plaintiff, should compensate the Plaintiff for the Plaintiff’s loss due to the failure to perform his/her duty of due care as a mandatory manager.

B. On May 2015, the following circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of the statement (including paper numbers) and evidence Nos. 1 through 3 and the entire purport of the pleading, namely, the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s employees: (a) did not receive two account information (the last place) from one bank in the name of the Deceased; (b) the Plaintiff did not raise any objection or question as to the omission of the account at the time; (c) the Defendant asserted that even through the financial transaction inquiry service provided by the Financial Supervisory Service at the time, the Plaintiff confirmed the deceased’s name even through the financial transaction inquiry service provided by the Financial Supervisory Service, but did not confirm the two accounts at issue; and (d) on May 26, 2019, the Plaintiff did not know information about the above accounts even through the inquiry service again on May 26, 2019; and (e) penalty tax, among the damages claimed by the Plaintiff, was difficult to view that there was a reasonable causal relation between the Plaintiff’s duty of due care and the Plaintiff’s failure to report the gift tax within the period of 2013 months.

It is difficult to recognize that the case is directly related to the delegated business of this case, and otherwise, this is difficult.