1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The second period of 2013,592,11,592,100 1,391,5391,537,537,000 2,983,648,000 for the second period of 2014-1,284,728,000 1,284,284,284,7284,728,728,728,000 total 2,079,700,2676,265,0004,756,035,000

A. On October 20, 2009, the Plaintiff is a corporation established for the purpose of engaging in the dispatched business, etc. of workers. From the first half of the year 2013 to the first half of the value-added tax in 2014, the Plaintiff received the tax invoice of KRW 4,756,035,00 (i.e., KRW 487,659,000, KRW 2,983,648,000, KRW 1,284,728,000 (hereinafter “the tax invoice of this case”), and the value-added tax was paid by deducting the input tax amount from the output tax amount as listed in the table under the first half of the year 2013 to the first half of the Value-Added Tax Act (hereinafter “C”).

B. However, the Defendant calculated the amount of taxation by denying the deduction of the pertinent input tax amount on the grounds that the instant tax invoice constitutes “illegal tax invoice” written in falsity without a real transaction. On December 1, 2014, the Defendant issued a revised and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 84,813,580 of the value-added tax for the first time, No. 13,813,580, value-added tax for the second time, No. 2013, value-added tax for the second time, No. 502,446,320, and value-added tax for the first time, No. 209,372,120, and corporate tax for the business year 2013, respectively.

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant dispositions” by referring to the imposition of value-added tax and corporate tax as above.

On July 24, 2015, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with each of the instant dispositions and filed an appeal on July 24, 2015, but the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim on October 6, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number, if any) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The Plaintiff’s tax invoice of this case.