1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is ordered.

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the argument in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is examined together with the evidence submitted in this court, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justified.

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as set forth in the following paragraph (2). Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence

2. On the 4th page of that part, the portion of the tax invoice No. 4, in turn, the tax invoice No. 3 added the “additional Tax on Insincere Payment” to “additional Tax on Insincere Payment”.

In Part 4, "the above additional tax" in Part 5 shall be added to "the above additional tax in bad faith of the tax invoice".

No. 4 of the table No. 4, the above "235,980,00 won x 2/100 won x 2/1000 won x 235,980,000 won x 2/100 of the above 235,980 x 59,224 won."

In Part 9, "I cannot discover" in Part 2, "and C, at the time of filing a false value-added tax return, have prepared and submitted at will a detailed statement on the receipt amount of false credit card sales slip receipt amount of 332,927,626 won for February 2, 2016, 2016, including 371,439,439,222 won for February 2, 2015 and 371,439,222 won for February 2, 2016, and 21,912,542 won for January 2017, 2017. The reduction of the amount of value-added tax payable and the preparation of transaction data by the processing is closely related to the issuance of false sales tax invoices, but it appears that C did not notify the Plaintiff thereof."

In Part 9, “Plaintiff” shall add “A” to “Before entrusting C with the return of value-added tax,” and “A” shall be deemed to have no experience in the field concerned, such as designating K as a tax manager, even if it is designated as a stock company.”