2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. The plaintiffs company related to the plaintiffs was established on November 7, 1996 as the main business of real estate rental business.

Plaintiff

B is holding 100% of the shares of the Plaintiff Company, and is in office as a director and a representative director of the Plaintiff Company from November 13, 2004 to March 29, 2010; from March 30, 2010 to March 29, 2013; and is in office as an internal director after the resignation of the representative director on March 29, 2013.

(After the plaintiff B resigns the representative director, the plaintiff company does not have a separate representative director, and the plaintiff B operates the plaintiff company as the representative).

1) The Plaintiff Company sold real estate for lease held on April 2006 and sold 4,295,000,000 won out of the proceeds of the sale (hereinafter “the provisional payment”).

2) On the other hand, the director of the Gangnam District Tax Office lent the instant branch funds to Plaintiff B, and then treated them as provisional payments. 2) On the other hand, the director of the Gangnam District Tax Office rendered an administrative guidance to consider the instant branch funds as provisional payments and calculated the interest rate to be recognized as provisional payments.

Plaintiff

On July 19, 2013, the company included the interest rate recognized as the provisional payment in the gross income in accordance with the above administrative guidance, and treated the representative as the bonus, and filed a revised return and payment of the corporate tax and the labor income tax for the year 2008 to 2011.

3) Since then, the Plaintiff Company made a request for correction of the tax on earned income accrued from February 28, 2014 to 2011 on the ground that: (a) on the ground that: (b) the Plaintiff erroneously received the interest on the provisional payment of this case, and subsequently erroneously made a request for correction of the tax on earned income accrued from February 28, 2014 to 2011; and (c) on March 5, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for correction of the corporate tax accrued from March 201 to 2012 on the ground that the interest initially received was erroneously designated as the account at the time of accounting settlement; and (d) the Defendant filed a request for correction against