1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. From January 14, 2015 to May 31, 2016, the Plaintiff engaged in the wholesale and retail business of non-ferrous and scrap metal with the trade name “C” from Gwangju City B and the first floor.

B. During the value-added tax period from January 2015 to January 2016, 2016, the Plaintiff issued sales tax invoices of KRW 42,086,546,314 in total of the supply values as follows, and reported and paid KRW 4,104,231,91 in total, after receiving purchase tax invoices of KRW 1,074,414,881 in total of the supply values:

(hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant tax invoices”)

C. The Plaintiff is a purchaser pursuant to Article 106-9(2) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (Amended by Act No. 13797, Jan. 19, 2016).

It did not collect the output tax amount, and the purchaser deposited the value-added tax in the account of value-added tax management established in the new bank in accordance with the special case of payment by the purchaser of the copper scrap scrap under Article 106-2(3) of the same Act.

As a result, the director of the Central Regional Tax Office verified that each of the instant tax invoices was received by falsity without actual transactions, on two occasions against the Plaintiff (the period subject to investigation: the period from January 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016). Based on the findings, he/she issued a processing tax invoice and subsequently deducted the amount of output tax and the amount of input tax in total from the amount of tax already returned and paid less the amount of additional tax, etc. from the amount of tax already returned and paid to the Plaintiff (i) KRW 3,238,061,269 in total (i) KRW 3,238,061,269 in total (ii) KRW 397,209,861 in 2015, KRW 1,579,203,468 won in February 2, 2015, and KRW 1,261,647,940 in 2016 (hereinafter “instant correction resolution”).

E. On May 27, 2016 and September 21, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the results of each tax investigation to the effect that the pertinent tax amount would be refunded.

F. After October 12, 2016, the Plaintiff: (a) value-added tax for the first term portion of 2015 to the Defendant on October 12, 2016; and (b) value-added tax for the second term portion of 2015 to the Defendant.