1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 16, 2017, the chief prosecutor of the Incheon District Prosecutors’ Office requested the director of the Incheon Southern District Tax Office to file an accusation against the Plaintiff on the grounds of the evasion of value-added tax.

The nominal name business registration number of Plaintiff D E, the date of business opening the place of business of Plaintiff D E, Incheon F, on June 4, 2015, and on February 19, 2018, GHBF on July 18, 2013, July 31, 2016, I J CF on August 31, 2016, 201.

After conducting a tax investigation on the Plaintiff, the director of the tax office of South Korea filed a complaint against the Plaintiff as a violation of the Punishment of Tax Evaders Act, on the ground that the Plaintiff was unlawfully refunded value-added tax by registering the business under the name of the Plaintiff and his spouse B, and wife C and reporting the purchase price of used cars more than the actual purchase price of used cars, with respect to each of the following enterprises (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant enterprises”) from the second taxable period of 2013 to the first taxable period of 2016.

C. On February 1, 2018, the director of the tax office having jurisdiction over the foregoing illegal refund of value-added tax notified the Plaintiff of the correction of the total of KRW 446,325,250 (including each additional tax) of each value-added tax as stated in the No. 1 or No. 15, respectively. The director of the tax office of Incheon notified the Plaintiff of the correction and correction of the total of KRW 3,83,130 (including each additional tax) of each global income tax as listed in the No. 16, and No. 17, February 7, 2018, respectively.

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant dispositions,” including the imposition of value-added tax and global income tax, D.

The Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on each of the instant dispositions, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on March 27, 2019, and the Plaintiff was served on March 29, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 18, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 to 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

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

A. The actual operator of each of the instant companies asserted by the Plaintiff is K and L, and the Plaintiff is from July 2013.