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

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

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff did not have any transactional relationship with the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff was the purchaser, and Defendant C issued the tax invoice of KRW 17,192,00 in total from April 2017 to August 2017, and KRW 63,740,100 in total from August 2017 to December 2017.

The Plaintiff failed to verify that it is an erroneous tax invoice, and filed an input tax return as it is, at the time of filing the VAT and corporate tax return.

After all, the Defendants were bound to unilaterally cancel the issuance of the said tax invoice and revise the purchaser by re-issuance of the tax invoice. The Plaintiff suffered losses from additional payment of taxes of KRW 47,872,360 in total, including corporate tax of KRW 20,909,60, global income tax of KRW 815,200, global income tax of KRW 26,147,560, as the Plaintiff was recognized as the representative.

Therefore, the Defendants are liable to compensate for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff according to the ratio of the amount of each tax invoice.

B. In light of the judgment, the fact that the Defendants mistakenly issued the tax invoice by designating the Plaintiff as the purchaser does not conflict between the parties, but the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff.

It is reasonable to deem that the filing of a tax return in accordance with the tax invoice issued by mistake is the Plaintiff’s own liability. Furthermore, it is difficult to deem that there is a proximate causal relationship between the damage that “the occurrence of additional tax liability” and the Defendants’ erroneous issuance and amendment of the tax invoice as alleged by the Plaintiff’s submission alone.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted.

2. Thus, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.