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. The reasons why the court should explain the instant case in this case are as follows: (a) 2nd and 2nd and 16th and 2nd and 3nd and 1st and 2nd of the judgment of the first instance; (b) 3nd and 4th of the judgment of the first instance, “each was dismissed; (c) the Plaintiff appealed (Seoul High Court 2015Nu53260); (d) the appeal was rendered on April 28, 2016; (d) the appeal was filed on May 16, 2016; and (e) the instant case was pending in the final appeal; (e) the Plaintiff’s assertion by the third and third 6th through 10th of the judgment of the first instance is dismissed as described in paragraph (2) below; and (e) the second 4th and fourth 4th 4th , “the second 3rd 4th 1,” and (e) subsequent 3rd 2016 of the former Value-Added Tax Act.”

Section 3.B below, on the 7th page, the following 2.

With the exception of adding the contents of paragraph, it is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the list of value-added taxes. Therefore, it is accepted by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420

2. Article 16(1) of the former Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11873, Jun. 7, 2013; hereinafter the same) is a tax invoice issued by the head of Incheon Customs Office to the Plaintiff as a genuine importer by changing the import entity. Article 16(1) of the former Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11873, Jun. 7, 2013; hereinafter the same) does not apply to the head of the relevant customs office who is not a taxpayer. The instant import tax invoice does not contain any necessary entry differently from the fact, and constitutes a revised import tax invoice that is deemed as a input tax credit. However, the Plaintiff was unable

3. The addition;

(a) On the fourth level below, the following parts and the instant case: