1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, such as accepting the judgment of the court of first instance, is as follows, and the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding the part pertaining to “3. conclusion” excluding the part pertaining to the judgment) are as stated in Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for supplementing or adding the judgment according to the following 2.

[Ground for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 6, Eul evidence Nos. 8, 10, 17, and 19, unless otherwise specified.

(i) entry and the purport of the entire pleadings;

2. Supplement and addition of judgments;

A. 1) The Plaintiff asserts that the instant tax investigation conducted against the non-party company constitutes an irregular tax investigation based on the regular selection under Article 81-6 (2) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes, not an occasional investigation under Article 81-6 (3) of the same Act, and that the instant tax investigation was unlawful since the non-party company did not have any reason to be subject to regular selection. However, in light of the content of the investigation, etc., the aforementioned provision on the tax investigation in the notice of this case appears to be a clerical error in Article 81-6 (3) 4 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and it is reasonable to view that the instant tax investigation constitutes an irregular tax investigation based on Article 81-6 (3) 4 of the Framework Act on National Taxes. The Plaintiff’s assertion on a different premise is without merit, and even if there were no legitimate grounds for the non-party company’s selection of the non-party company, the Plaintiff’s main reasons for the “30,000 won labor expense appropriation for processing personnel expenses” cannot be deemed unlawful.