2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The judgment of the court of first instance No. 1 and No. 2

A. Plaintiff’s imposition disposition of value-added tax and global income tax on B 1) The head of Gwangju District Tax Office under the Plaintiff’s control (hereinafter “C”) is a stock company that the head of the female tax office under the Plaintiff’s control took place from January 20, 2015 to February 6, 2015 (hereinafter “C”).

(B) In the course of the tax investigation with respect to B, from 2010 to 2012, the fact that B had been awarded a contract for electrical construction and had the sales omitted (hereinafter “instant sales omission”).

(B) After confirmation, either the value-added tax and the global income tax were separately determined and notified to B as indicated in the table below (hereinafter referred to as the “instant tax imposition disposition”); and the claim is “instant tax claim.”

(2) On April 17, 2017, the tax item and amount of taxes in the taxable period (original) on the 1st day of Apr. 17, 2017, KRW 92,333,070, KRW 54,382,610 on February 1, 2010, KRW 108,01; KRW 108,017,550 on February 131, 2015, KRW 870 on 117,002, KRW 680 on 2012, KRW 162,742,520 on 2017, KRW 148,562,40 on global income and KRW 400 on 2010 on 2017, the judgment of the Gwangju District Court did not dismiss the said electrical construction work as an employee of the said District Court on the premise that he/she was not subject to the final judgment of the Gwangju District Court on 2017.

B. B’s disposal disposition (hereinafter “instant real estate”) is the registration of transfer of ownership based on a gift on October 18, 2016 (No. 8638) and October 17, 2016 (hereinafter “instant gift contract”).