1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following additional parts, thereby citing it pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Then, from the 7th bottom of the judgment of the first instance, the following is added: “The decision of the Tax Tribunal (No. 4-12) cited by the Plaintiff is not a matter pertaining to the Korea-EU FTA, and thus it is inappropriate to invoke it in this case.”

At the bottom of the 7th judgment of the first instance, the following shall be added:

4) The Plaintiff asserts to the effect that, among the dispositions in this case, at least, the imposition of additional tax is unlawful on the ground that there is a justifiable ground that it cannot be caused by the failure of the Plaintiff to perform his/her duty. Penalty tax under tax law is an administrative sanction imposed, as prescribed by the Act, in order to facilitate the exercise of the right to impose taxes and the realization of tax claims, where a taxpayer violates various duties, such as a declaration and tax payment, without justifiable grounds, and the taxpayer’s intentional negligence is not considered. However, such a sanction is not reasonable, or it is unreasonable to expect the taxpayer to fulfill his/her duty because it is difficult for the taxpayer to be aware of his/her duty, or there is a circumstance that it is unreasonable for the taxpayer to expect the fulfillment of his/her duty (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Du666, Aug. 23, 2002; 2006Du11750, Oct. 23, 2008).