A. According to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including branch numbers) and the whole arguments as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff, who operates construction machinery contracting and leasing business under the trade name "C", on March 4, 2015, was requested to rent dump trucks necessary for transporting soil and sand for the development of tin acid from the defendant B, who worked at the construction site of Domsan Development Project for Domsan in the first time on March 2015 (hereinafter "the defendant defense industry development"), to whom the transportation cost and value-added tax are to be paid until the 15th of the following month from March 4, 2015 to July 5, 2015, the plaintiff may recognize the fact that the plaintiff's dump trucks trucks owned by the plaintiff, F, G, Do, hump trucks trucks from dump and hump trucks from 0 to 30 pump trucks from the above construction site, 90 pump trucks and 9.

According to the above facts, the defendant is obliged to pay the transport cost for dump trucks 4 which the plaintiff invested in the construction site, and the total value added tax for 50,983,90 won and delay damages incurred therefrom, unless there are special circumstances to the plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion against the defendant B is justified.

B. On the determination of Defendant B’s assertion, Defendant B asserts that, although Defendant B shall pay the Plaintiff the value-added tax on the above transport cost, Defendant B did not have any duty to pay the value-added tax on the transport cost since there was no tax invoice issued on the above transport cost.

However, if there is an agreement between the parties to the transaction to bear the value-added tax, an amount equivalent to the value-added tax under that agreement.