1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s value-added tax and corporate tax return and payment 1) is a company that was established on June 18, 2015 and runs the non-ferrous metal wholesale business, etc., and B is the Plaintiff’s representative director. 2) The Plaintiff is the Plaintiff’s representative director, as shown below [Attachment 1], from January 1, 2015.

6. To 30. Hereinafter the same shall apply.

2) The second period (from July 1 to December 31, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply) of 2015.

) Three purchaser offices (hereinafter referred to as “purchase offices”) such as C (Representative D), E (Representative F), G (Representative H) during each of the first taxable periods in 2016.

(3) A purchase tax invoice (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) equivalent to KRW 34,684,144,000 in total of supply value (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) to the effect that it was supplied with waste Dongs (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”).

(2) The Plaintiff reported and paid a value-added tax by deducting the input tax amount pursuant to the purchase agreement issued from the purchase place in the year 2015 to the second period in the year 2016, upon filing a return of each value-added tax on the purchase price for the taxable period from the first period in 2015 to the second period in 2016, the first period in 28,482,254,00 E F in the year 1 to 2016.3,233,606,00 GH in the year 2015 to the second period in the year 2015.

4) In addition, the Plaintiff reported and paid corporate tax by adding the value of supply pursuant to the said purchase tax invoice issued by the purchaser upon filing a corporate tax return for the business year of 2015 to the necessary expenses. (b) The Director of the Daegu Regional Tax Office’s tax investigation and the Defendant’s disposition of imposition 1) from February 17, 2016

5. By December 21, 200, C issued a tax invoice without real transaction to the Plaintiff as a result of conducting a tax investigation on C, the purchaser of the Plaintiff.

2. The director of Daegu Regional Tax Office conducted a tax investigation on the plaintiff from July 11, 2016 to November 25 of the year.

As a result, the tax invoice of this case issued by the Plaintiff from the purchaser is different from the fact.