1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

A. The Plaintiff is a person who has registered his/her business under each of the trade names, “C” and “D,” in the Seo-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan City.

B. Under the premise that personal services provided under the name of “C” (hereinafter “instant personal services”) constitute “job placement services” as a value-added tax-free business, the Plaintiff did not report and pay value-added tax equivalent to the amount of sales account statement issued by C during the first half of 2008 and from 2010 to the first half of 2012.

C. From September 6, 2012 to October 10, 2012, the Defendant conducted a tax investigation with the Plaintiff, based on the Plaintiff’s trade name, determined that the Plaintiff actually engaged in human resources supply business, which is a taxable business, and determined that the amount of revenue was calculated by including the value-added tax base of “D” operated by the Plaintiff; and on February 8, 2013, the Defendant issued a notice of KRW 1,131,30 of the value-added tax for the first period of value-added tax of 1,1308, KRW 42,885,220 of the value-added tax for the first year of 2010, KRW 131,922,540 of the value-added tax for the second year of 2010, KRW 248,03,280 of the value-added tax for the first year of 201, KRW 163,420, value-added tax for the second year of 2080, KRW 1675,7

(hereinafter “each disposition of this case”) D.

The Plaintiff filed a request for pre-assessment review on November 23, 2012, which was prior to each of the instant dispositions, but was dismissed on January 17, 2013. The Plaintiff filed a request for a tax review again on April 22, 2013 regarding each of the instant dispositions, but was dismissed on July 12, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 7 (including each number), and the whole purport of the pleading, whether each disposition of this case is legitimate

A. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion is that the job offering company introduced and arranged the employment of daily workers to the job offering company, and then the job offering company's request and the daily worker's request make a lump sum transfer of the wage on a monthly basis, and deducts the amount of 10% of the daily wage as the job placement fee.