1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From May 15, 2009 to November 30, 2013, the Plaintiff was registered as a personal business entity (hereinafter “instant business registration”) with respect to a mutual business entity, “C,” which runs machinery parts manufacturing business in Gyeonggi City B.

B. From September 8, 2009 to September 5, 2013, the Defendant imposed and collected each value-added tax (including additional tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 to 13 in the separate sheet from September 8, 2009, and imposed and collected each global income tax (including additional tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) listed in the separate sheet No. 14 to 19 in the same list from August 5, 2010 to November 5, 2012.

(C) The imposition and collection disposition of each of the above value-added taxes and each of the above global income taxes are added to “each of the above dispositions” (hereinafter “each of the above dispositions”).

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal with the Tax Tribunal seeking revocation of part of each disposition of imposition and collection of value-added tax as stated in subparagraph 1(b). On October 14, 2015, the Tax Tribunal rejected the Plaintiff’s appeal. The reason is that the part notified due to the failure to pay value-added tax is merely a procedure for collecting the amount of tax determined by the Value-Added Tax Return, and it does not constitute a disposition subject to appeal, and the expected part was 90 days prior to the filing period.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 5, 9, 11, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 4, 7, and 10 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s registration of the instant business operator under the Plaintiff’s title was made without the Plaintiff’s permission, and the Plaintiff operated the registered business entity or received no profit therefrom, and each of the instant dispositions was not lawfully served on the Plaintiff.

Therefore, each of the dispositions in this case is invalid because there is a serious and obvious defect.

3. Related Acts and subordinate statutes;