All appeals are dismissed.

Of the costs of appeal, the costs of appeal between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Dong Tax Office are individually assessed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On January 25, 2008, the court below, citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, concluded the contract of this case on January 25, 2008 with the name "Joint Venture Contract" (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Joint Venture Contract"), i.e., e., e., s., s. 30% of the remainder other than rolling fees from the customer's sales generated by solar training, etc., ii 3,392, 274, 720 (hereinafter referred to as "the value-added tax"), i.e., 200 to 30% of the total amount of 10 years from 208 to 2010 of the total amount of 30 years from 30 years from 2008 to 2010 of the Value-Added Tax Act, i.e., 2010 to 30% of the total amount of 30 years from 2010 to 30 years from 19.

Then, the lower court: (a) there is no agreement on the settlement of losses and expenses that may arise from the business; and (b) it appears that the matters to be fulfilled such as training are limited to the solicitation of customers, and there is no participation in the operation of the casino of this case; and (b) rather, according to the instant contract, both parties themselves bear the costs associated with the business performance conducted by themselves.