1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. On April 1, 2002, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) between the Defendants, who had been employed by the instant maintenance business entity, was operating the instant maintenance business entity in the name of the Plaintiff; and (b) the Defendants agreed to pay value-added tax, global income tax, etc. imposed on the operation of the instant maintenance business entity.

However, while operating the instant maintenance business, the Defendants purchased false tax invoices in order to meet the sales and purchase tax amount, and used them as tax data. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and the Defendants continued to operate the instant maintenance business on January 1, 2003, and paid to the Plaintiff an amount equivalent to 15% of the sales of the instant maintenance business, and the Plaintiff agreed to pay the value-added tax and global income tax imposed on the operation of the instant maintenance business (hereinafter “instant agreement”).

Then, since January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2003, the Defendants paid KRW 597,916,467 in total in the course of operating the instant maintenance business, the Defendants did not pay KRW 86,837,463 equivalent to 15% of the sales amount to the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant agreement, but did not pay it properly. Accordingly, the Plaintiff, the title holder of the instant maintenance business, who is the actual operator from 2005 to 2007, paid KRW 20,921,230 in total, including value-added tax and global income tax for the year 2003 imposed on behalf of the Defendants, who are the actual operator of the instant maintenance business.

Therefore, the defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the above KRW 20,921,230 to the plaintiff as well as damages for delay.

2...