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

A. The Plaintiff was appointed as the Director of the Tax Office on December 1, 2006, and served in the Seoul Regional Tax Office B Team under the Defendant from February 2, 2013 to February 2014, and was promoted to the Director of the Tax Office on November 6, 2015.

B. Within the Seoul regional tax office’s team, C (class assistant officials at that time) and D (class assistant officials at that time) as the head of the team and the Plaintiff as the head of the intermediary group were constituted of the team, and the Plaintiff conducted a tax investigation with C on August 2013, and conducted a tax investigation with C about F (hereinafter “F”).

C. On November 29, 2013, C received cash KRW 100,000,000 from the F’s office manager G, a tax accounting corporation’s business agent, for the reward for completing the tax investigation on F, as a bribe, and granted KRW 100,000 to H immediately on the same spot, but returned the said money to F at the request of H that it would return KRW 100,000,000 from the F, and voluntarily retired on February 2015.

On the other hand, the Plaintiff and C, along with I, who is an employee of H and F on March 22, 2014, provided aviation fees of 234,200 won, and the market value of meals and horses.

E. The Plaintiff was subject to inspection and investigation by the Plaintiff, who conducted a tax investigation of F as an anti-competence against C’s foregoing bribery case.

On March 2, 2015, the Plaintiff is placed in charge of inspection and investigation by the Defendant.

Although the fact that he received entertainment described in the port was accepted, the fact that he received money was denied.

C In addition, on March 4, 2015, the inspection and investigation officer asked that he received the said entertainment. However, on November 29, 2013, on the fact that he received money and valuables, he made a statement to the effect that he refused to receive money from H but on the spot.

Since then, C denies the crime of acceptance of bribe immediately after the suspect is suspected of acceptance of bribe, and the detention warrant was requested and enforced at the pre-trial suspect's examination date.