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

A. On February 2007, the Plaintiff obtained a license for reclamation of public waters with respect to 96,308 square meters on the 1st place line of Sung-ri, Sung-do for the purpose of building a shipbuilding facility site from the Gyeongnam-do Governor and conducted reclamation until June 2009, for the purpose of building a shipbuilding facility site.

B. On October 20, 2009, the Plaintiff: (a) invested in kind the land reclaimed (hereinafter “instant land reclaimed”); (b) made an investment in kind in the land reclaimed in the Ganland 1,88,095 common shares (e.g., 5,000 won, hereinafter “the instant land reclaimed”); and (c) entered into a contract on the issuance of 1,88,095 shares (e.g., 5,000 won, e., e., e., e., e., e., e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e.

C. On November 13, 2009, the Plaintiff invested in thisland cruises after obtaining authorization from the court of contribution in kind in the public waters reclamation area of this case. On November 18, 2009, the Plaintiff was issued 1,888,095 common shares in thisland cruises.

(hereinafter “Issuance of New Shares”) D.

On March 2010, at the time of filing a corporate tax return, the tax agent of the Ireland Port presented the opinion that the investment in kind in the public waters of this case is subject to value-added tax. On March 25, 2010, the Plaintiff issued a revised tax invoice to this Ireland Port on March 25, 2010, and on March 26, 201, the head of the competent tax office issued a revised tax invoice to the head of the competent tax office on value-added tax 94,047,550 on the investment in kind in the public waters of this case and the revised tax return to the head of the competent tax office on July 21, 201 (hereinafter “instant value-added tax return”).

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 1 through 5, purport of whole pleading

2. The defendant's claim for the payment of value-added tax refundable under the Administrative Litigation Act, not civil procedure.