1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 29, 2012, the Plaintiff, a company established for the purpose of self-support support projects, etc. for senior citizens and low-income underprivileged residents, acquired two Dongs located in Gyeongsan-dong, 609-48 and two parcels of land on April 6, 2012, and operated the building reconstruction project during the period of the first half to the first half of the value-added tax in 2012, and received the refund of value-added tax by filing an application for early refund of facility investment in the facilities during the first half to the first half of the value-added tax in 2013.

B. On December 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff had received input tax deduction even for the elderly convalescent hospital operated by the Plaintiff; and (b) rejected the Plaintiff’s input tax deduction related to the tax-free business; and (c) subsequently, on December 10, 2013, notified the Plaintiff of KRW 32,047,00 for the first term portion of value-added tax for the year 1,610,848, and value-added tax for the second term portion of value-added tax for the year 2012, respectively.

C. On February 17, 2014, the Plaintiff appealed and filed a petition for a trial with the Tax Tribunal. On June 23, 2014, the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to dismiss the Plaintiff’s request for a trial and served around that time.

On September 19, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant to revoke the instant disposition imposing value-added tax (2014Guhap2703) on September 19, 2014, but the instant case was concluded as the withdrawal order on November 11, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute and significant facts in this court, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-1, Gap evidence 2-1, Gap evidence 8, 9, Eul evidence 2-1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Defendant’s judgment on the main defense of this case’s lawsuit is unlawful, deeming that the lawsuit of this case was filed 90 days after the date of receipt of notice of the decision on the request for a tax appeal, and its main defense.

Notwithstanding the main sentence of Article 18 (1), Article 18 (2) and (3) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 56 of the Framework Act on National Taxes shall apply to any request for evaluation or adjudgment under this Act and such request.