1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The plaintiff is a certified tax accountant, and the defendant is a professor of the physical department of C University.

From July 2013 to September 2017, the Defendant served as the representative of the applied physical research institute (hereinafter “instant research institute”) which is a research facility affiliated with C University natural science university (hereinafter “instant research institute”).

D) From April 2016 to May 2017, when serving as the administrative staff of the instant research institute from April 2016 to May 2017, all administrative affairs [the receipt of facility usage fees, the issuance of tax invoices, the preparation of related accounting books, and other members ( professors and researchers) of the instant research institute excluding the general staff members of the instant research institute (D-3-4) are affiliated with Cuniversity natural science university, and their payment of wages and withholding taxes were dealt with in the accounts of Cuniversity juristic persons. Tax withholding, year-end tax settlement, value-added tax, etc. on earned income of C college.]

D around the beginning of March 2017, the Plaintiff verbally requested the Plaintiff to review the tax issues of the research institute in this case and to act as an agent for reporting to the National Tax Service (hereinafter “instant tax affairs”).

On March 2017, the Plaintiff received data from D through e-mail and examined them, and then performed duties, such as filing a return of tax return by deadline and filing a regular return of tax return by proxy, submission, etc., to the National Tax Service with regard to the performance status of withholding taxes for 12 months from April 2016 to March 2017 by general employees of the instant research institute.

The Plaintiff was also requested to prepare the value-added tax return of the instant research institute from D verbally, and examined related data through e-mail, but did not submit the value-added tax return to the National Tax Service.

On the other hand, D returned part of the amount to the research institute under suspicion of embezzlement of public funds of the research institute of this case, and resigned around May 15, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsurged Facts, Gap evidence 1 to 11, Eul evidence 4 to 9, and Eul 11.