The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. Article 47-3(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 11124, Dec. 31, 2011) provides that where a taxpayer under-reported the tax base by the statutory due date of return, an additional tax shall be imposed on under-reported when the taxpayer under-reported the tax base by the statutory due date of return. Article 47-5(1) and (2) provides that where the tax amount paid by the taxpayer falls short of the tax amount to be paid or the refunded amount exceeds the tax amount

In addition, Article 22(3) of the former Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11608, Jan. 1, 2013) provides that where an entrepreneur issues a tax invoice without supplying goods or services (Article 22(2)) and where an entrepreneur is issued a tax invoice without being supplied with goods or services (Article 3), an amount equivalent to 2/100 of the value of supply shall be imposed as an additional tax.

On the other hand, Article 48 (1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that where penalty taxes are imposed under this Act or other tax-related Acts, the Government shall choose not to impose penalty taxes if a taxpayer has justifiable grounds for failing to perform his/her obligations

Accordingly, when the issue is whether there is a justifiable reason to exempt the penalty tax, it is unreasonable for the taxpayer to be unaware of the duty, taking into account the purpose of individual laws and regulations on the basis of imposing the penalty tax.

It is unreasonable to expect a taxpayer to fulfill the duty or to determine whether it is a case where the taxpayer is not able to prove the failure of the taxpayer to fulfill the duty.

2. The lower court acknowledged the following facts in full view of the admitted evidence. A.

Co., Ltd.