1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that was established on August 11, 1972 and runs the business of manufacturing printed circuit board.

B. The Plaintiff, as indicated in the table below, delivered (hereinafter “the instant printed circuit board”) to B Limited Corporation (B) (B) a Chinese subsidiary of A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) during the taxable period from the second period to the second period from 2009 to the second period from the 2012, the sum of the supply value was 28,331,415,306 won in total.

Tax period (unit of won) 2,375,05, 105, 7,045, 201 2, 2012 2,22,548,491, 2012 2,548,49,491, 2842,2,52,548,440,830,830, 2010

C. The Plaintiff declared the value-added tax base for the Defendant on the ground that the instant transaction constitutes export transaction by applying the zero tax rate.

As a result of conducting a tax investigation on the part of value-added tax on the Plaintiff from August 2014 to September 201 of the same year, the Defendant determined that the instant transaction constituted a domestic transaction. On November 1, 2014, the Defendant imposed on the Plaintiff the value-added tax of the second period of value-added tax of the year 2009 (including the additional tax), KRW 1,086,050,470 (including the additional tax), the value-added tax of the first period of the year 2010, KRW 1,216,738,040 (including the additional tax), the value-added tax of the second period of the year 201, KRW 1,168,736,410 (including the additional tax), KRW 380,650 (including the additional tax), and KRW 309,309,309 (including the additional tax) for the second period of the year 2012 (including the additional tax), and KRW 309,2309,29 (309).

E. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on January 5, 2015, but was dismissed on June 24, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] There is no dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, and Eul evidence 1.