1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The plaintiffs who own 1/2 shares of the building in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”) are the entrepreneurs who jointly leased the instant building.

B. The Plaintiffs delegated D with all rights, such as the conclusion of the instant building lease agreement and the receipt of rent, etc., and appointed D and E as a custodian, and had D and E (hereinafter collectively referred to as “D, etc.”) manage the instant building.

C. D, etc. was subject to criminal punishment for eight months for the crime of being punished by imprisonment with labor for the following reasons: (a) lease of the instant building to F, Earbaman, etc., the lessee, and (b) use and embezzlement the instant building for personal purposes while in custody for the Plaintiffs by receiving rents from the lessee; and (c) use the building for personal purposes during the course of business.

The Defendant conducted an investigation on value-added tax related to the lease of the building of this case on July 2014, and confirmed that the Plaintiffs were omitted from the sales amount of KRW 60 million in 2009, and approximately KRW 28 million in the rent for the second period in 2009, which was embezzled by D, etc. entrusted with the management of the building of this case on October 1, 2014, and subsequently notified the Plaintiffs of the amount of value-added tax on KRW 11,109,560 (including additional tax), and the amount of value-added tax on KRW 5,109,109,362 (including additional tax) on July 21, 2014, and on October 1, 2014, the Defendant issued a revised notice of the amount of value-added tax on KRW 11,109,560 (including additional tax).

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant disposition”). (e) The instant disposition is deemed to be taken.

The Plaintiffs filed an appeal against the instant disposition with the Director of the Tax Tribunal on February 6, 2015, upon filing an objection, and received a decision of dismissal from the Director of the Tax Tribunal on July 14, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Gap evidence No. 5, Gap evidence No. 6, Eul evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 2 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. This.