1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the Plaintiff Company A’s revocation of the disposition imposing corporate tax for the business year of 2012 is revoked.

1. The reasoning of this case by the court of first instance is as follows, except for the dismissal or addition of a part of the judgment, and thus, it is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Judgment of the court of first instance that rejected the Plaintiffs’ assertion on the merits, even if the Plaintiff’s assertion on the merits was not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and all of the evidence submitted in the court of first instance and the court of first instance were examined, is justifiable] The court of first instance that rejected the Plaintiffs’ assertion on the merits. The court of first instance renders an dismissal or addition 1 to 6, as follows:

(1) The defendant's argument that the procedure of the preceding trial is complied with) is that the defendant only filed a request with the Tax Tribunal for the notice of change in the amount of income related to D with the plaintiff Gap, and did not file a request for a request with the Tax Tribunal for the imposition of corporate tax for the business year 2012 against the plaintiff Gap, and that this part of the lawsuit is unlawful as it does not go through the procedure of the preceding trial. (b) In the relevant legal administration, two or more administrative dispositions for the same purpose were conducted in the course of the phased and developmental process, and is related

In other words, when there is a justifiable reason, such as where the tax authority changed the taxation disposition subject to the tax administrative disposition while the tax administrative litigation is in progress, and the reason for illegality is common, or where several persons are to bear the same obligation by the same administrative disposition, one of the persons who are liable for tax payment is given an opportunity to make a new decision on the basic facts and legal issues, and where it seems that it would be harsh to have caused the taxpayer to undergo a new trial procedure, the taxpayer should undergo the previous trial procedure.