1. All of the lawsuits filed by the plaintiff (the plaintiff for retrial) against the defendant (the defendant for retrial of this case) shall be dismissed.

2...

The following facts are apparent or apparent to this court in the judgment subject to a retrial.

The Plaintiff filed a return on global income tax for 2004 and value-added tax for 2004, respectively, on the ground that the purchase amount of KRW 571,312,00,000 (hereinafter “the purchase tax invoice of this case”) is the representative of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 516, and the purchase amount of KRW 571,312,00,00, total of the supply amount received from Co., Ltd. D (hereinafter “D”) was included in the necessary expenses, and the purchase amount was deducted.

B. As a result of the tax investigation against D, the director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office confirmed the purchase tax invoice of this case as the purchase tax invoice purchased from data, and notified the Defendants of the taxation data. On April 2, 2007, the director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office issued the notice of correction and notification of value-added tax for 2004 as KRW 82,217,50 on the grounds that the purchase tax invoice of this case was not deducted from the purchase tax invoice of this case, and the head of the Seoul District Tax Office corrected and notified the purchase tax invoice of this case as KRW 82,217,50 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). On September 1, 2008, the director of the Seoul Western District Tax Office added the purchase tax invoice of this case to the necessary expenses, and notified the comprehensive income tax for 318,428,

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition imposing income tax,” and combined with the instant supplementary disposition, the instant disposition is referred to as “each of the instant dispositions”).

On July 23, 2007, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant supplementary details and disposition, but the same year.

9. 20. 20. Dismissal. On November 7, 198, the National Tax Tribunal requested a trial on the appeal, but was dismissed on the ground that the notice of the above disposition was served on December 28 of the same year and 90 days passed after the appeal was filed.

In addition, on November 11, 2008, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the disposition imposing the income tax of this case, but was dismissed on December 23 of the same year, and on March 2, 2009, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the National Tax Tribunal for the adjudication on March 2, 2009.

4.30. was dismissed. D.

The plaintiff on July 29, 2009 is the defendants.