1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On February 22, 2006, the Plaintiff was a person who was in general control over the Plaintiff’s business by establishing a company B (mutual change to C Co., Ltd. on October 28, 2009; hereinafter “instant company”) and holding the office of president, and D is a person who was in office as the representative director of the instant company until February 22, 2009.

B. Around 2006 and 2007, the Defendant conducted a tax investigation for each business year of the instant company, and disposed of the amount of KRW 743,930,525 (2006, 682,212,925, 61,717,600, 207, and hereinafter “instant amount of outflow from the company”) out of the instant company as bonus to D on the ground that it belonged to D.

However, D received a final and conclusive judgment in a lawsuit seeking revocation of the disposition of global income tax imposed on the above disposition of income (Seoul Administrative Court 2013Guhap57082), and the Defendant deemed the Plaintiff as a de facto representative of the instant company based on the evidence in the relevant criminal trial (Seoul Central District Court 2008 Gohap1089) and disposed of the Plaintiff as a bonus for the Plaintiff on June 12, 2015, on the ground that it is unclear that the amount of the instant outflow was reverted to the company, and on June 12, 2015, notified the Plaintiff of the increase in global income tax of 270,673,830 won and global income tax of 15,319,920 won reverted to the year 206.

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

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with each of the dispositions in this case and filed a request for review with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on March 16, 2016, upon filing an objection on September 1, 2015, but was dismissed on June 2, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap Nos. 1, 7, 8 (including branch numbers, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 is merely an owner and a financial support by holding D's position as the chairperson of the company of this case from July 10, 2006 to February 18, 2008 by taking over the shares and management rights again from D's transfer of all the shares and management rights of this case to D.