1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (a) the 6th 9th 9 of the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as the “instant second contract”; and (b) the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff emphasizes or adds to this court is identical to the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following 2. Additional determination; and (c) thus, the same shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act

(a) An additional determination; 2. Additional determination

A. In addition to the price of KRW 300 million under the instant contract, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff incurred damages, such as paying KRW 50 million to B separately and KRW 60 million.

Nevertheless, it is unlawful for the Plaintiff to make the instant disposition based solely on the fact that the Plaintiff received down payment of KRW 73,495,500 under the instant contract No. 2 through B.

B. As one of the other income, Article 21(1)10 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12852, Dec. 23, 2014; hereinafter the same) provides that “a penalty or compensation received due to a breach or cancellation of a contract” is “a penalty or compensation received due to a breach or termination of a contract.” Article 41(7) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 29523, Feb. 12, 2019) provides that “The penalty or compensation” refers to the compensation received due to a breach or termination of a contract on property rights and the compensation exceeding the damages per se to the payment itself that forms the original content of the contract, regardless of its title, shall not be deemed the value of money or other goods.” In such cases, if the value of money, etc. returned due to a breach or termination of a contract does not exceed the total amount paid initially under the contract itself.”

As alleged by the Plaintiff, in addition to the price of KRW 300 million under the “instant First Contract”, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50 million and KRW 60 million to B, etc.