2. The plaintiff, Ga.

A. The gist of the claim is to seek against the defendant C, who is an illegal occupant, the location of the building listed in the attached Table 1, to implement the procedure for reporting the closure of business registration listed in the attached Table 4.

B. In full view of the following circumstances, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff and the Defendant C acquire or lose any rights and duties by making a report on closure of the business registration with the building listed in the attached Form 1, which Defendant C transferred from Defendant C without permission, as the business place, and thus, the Plaintiff and the Defendant C cannot be deemed to have acquired or lost any rights and duties. Therefore, for reasons as alleged by the Plaintiff, it is difficult to bring an action against the Defendant C by filing

Therefore, the part of the claim for the notification of business registration among the lawsuit against Defendant C is unlawful.

① The legislative intent of the Value-Added Tax Act or the Income Tax Act is to enable the tax authorities to identify taxpayers and secure the taxation data. This is merely a report of business facts established by filing an application for registration with the head of the competent tax office, and the issuance of a business registration certificate is merely an act of issuing a certificate proving such registration, and it does not cause a change in the status of the business entity due to a change in the business

(2) According to Article 8(7) of the Value-Added Tax Act, where a business operator closes down his/her business or does not actually commence his/her business, the head of the competent tax office may cancel the business registration ex officio.

(3) Where business registration is changed differently from the business registration report, it shall be meaningful only when it is combined with a specific place of business, such as where business registration is corrected.