1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

Attached Form 1 [Attachment 1] written by the defendant against the plaintiff.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, with the exception of the details of the disposition and the amendment or addition under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes as stated in the A, B, and 2

B. The same is as indicated in the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes. A. The amended portion of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) Section 15 of the former Commercial Act (amended by Act No. 10696, May 23, 201; hereinafter the same shall apply) is as “former Commercial Act (amended by Act No. 10600, Apr. 14, 201; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (b) Section 3 is as follows: (a) Section 1 of the former Commercial Act (amended by Act No. 10600, Apr. 14, 201; hereinafter the same shall apply); and (b) Section 3 is as follows.

On November 7, 2013, the Defendant revoked the portion of KRW 68,724,921 of the corporate tax attributed to year 2008, which was pending the instant lawsuit. On November 22, 2013, the Defendant imposed an additional tax of KRW 30,915,579 and KRW 68,716,480, including additional tax for underreporting KRW 37,80,90,90 on November 22, 2013, and imposed an additional tax of KRW 68,716,480 on the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition .........." as stated in the [Attachment 1] includes the "Disposition ..........."

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff acquired shares in the name of B, C, and D for the purpose of the retirement of shares through lawful procedures (hereinafter “instant shares”). As such, the instant contract is valid pursuant to subparagraph 1 of Article 341 of the former Commercial Act.

Therefore, the instant disposition based on the premise that the instant contract is null and void is unlawful.

B. The instant contract is an act performed by the company for business purposes, and is a commercial activity, and the right to claim the return of the instant money due to the invalidation of the instant contract is also a commercial claim, and five years extinctive prescription applies

On December 21, 2005, the period of extinctive prescription expired since the Plaintiff paid the instant money to B, C, and D, and on December 21, 2005, the Plaintiff’s refund claim and its interest claim were extinguished.

Therefore, this case's disposition even after 2006.