1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts may be acknowledged by taking account of the following facts: Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-2, Eul evidence 2-6, each of the entries and the whole purport of pleadings:

From October 13, 2010, the Plaintiff, who runs a wholesale and retail business with the trade name of “B”, supplied scrap metal to D, who runs a wholesale and retail business with the trade name of “C” during the period of the taxable period of value-added tax from 208 to 2009.

B. As a result of the Busan regional tax office’s tax investigation conducted with respect to C from March 13, 2012 to May 11, 2012, the Busan regional tax office did not receive a tax invoice even if C was supplied with scrap metal equivalent to KRW 31,394,093,960 from the collection of scrap metal during the taxable period from the first to second period from March 2008, and then notified the Defendant of the above findings of investigation.

C. On January 3, 2013, the Defendant determined that the Plaintiff failed to file a return by omitting KRW 62,745,863 among the sales in this case on the grounds of the findings of the investigation notified as above, and imposed and collected the value-added tax (including the additional tax) on January 3, 2013 by treating the said amount as the total tax base as indicated below (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[The details of the instant disposition] The tax base (original value-added tax (original) for the taxable period of 208 62,745,863,863 8,165,1209 11,472,002,372,520 209 2,74,730,000 952,100 62,745,8631,489,740 for the second period of 208 209

D. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for review with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on May 13, 2013, but was dismissed on July 16, 2013.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Plaintiff 1) The Defendant’s assertion that the instant disposition was unlawful as it was unlawful, since there was no objective evidence that the Plaintiff omitted the sales of the instant case without filing a report. 2) The Plaintiff’s place of business, business facilities, and human resources for operating the scrap metal business.