1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

The reasoning of this Court’s judgment cited in the judgment of the first instance is identical to that of the judgment of the first instance except for the following “2. Amendment” and “3. Additional Determination,” and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In two parts to be modified, the term “construction amount:652,00,000” shall be read as “construction amount: 650,000,000”.

Under 5 pages 7 and 6, the term "by February 28, 2017" shall be read as "by March 30, 2017".

The 6th parallel 7th parallel 12th parallel shall be as follows:

1) If an entrepreneur who supplied goods or services fails to issue a tax invoice without any justifiable reason, fails to deduct the input tax amount, in principle, the supplier shall be liable to compensate for the damages equivalent to the input tax amount not deducted for the person who supplied the goods or services.

The same applies to the case where a person who received the supply did not deduct the input tax through the procedure for issuing a purchaser-issued tax invoice, barring special circumstances.

(2) In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, the Plaintiff paid KRW 80 million to the Defendants, including KRW 20,000,000,000,000,000 to December 13, 2016, and KRW 50,000,000 to December 28, 2016 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da265266, Dec. 28, 2017). In light of the overall purport of the pleadings, the Plaintiff did not issue a tax invoice to the Plaintiff on December 20, 2016, and the Plaintiff did not deduct the Plaintiff from the input tax amount.

According to the above facts, the defendants are liable for damages to the plaintiff, which is 8.1 million won, which is equivalent to the above input tax amount.