1. The part of the instant lawsuit seeking revocation of the disposition imposing additional dues shall be dismissed.

2. The defendant against the plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Defendant determined that on November 6, 2013, the Plaintiff imposed global income tax of 85,771,930 won on the Plaintiff on November 6, 2013, on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff engaged in an electronic commerce transaction with the trade name “C” located in the fourth floor of Seoul Gangnam-gu B building 4300; and (b) the Plaintiff did not file a global income tax return for 2012.

8. The notice was given by electronic service.

(hereinafter “instant disposition imposing global income tax”). B.

On November 10, 2013, the Defendant served with the Plaintiff a demand notice demanding that the Plaintiff pay “the global income tax of KRW 85,771,930, the global income tax of KRW 88,345,080 (including additional charges and increased additional charges of KRW 2,573,150) and the global income tax of KRW 89,374,340 (including additional charges and increased additional charges of KRW 3,602,410)” until December 31, 2013 and the global income tax of KRW 89,374,340 until January 31, 2014.

C. On January 28, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a petition with the Tax Tribunal for a trial on the same year.

5. The dismissal was 27.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 23, 25, 26 evidence, Eul's 1 through 4 (including each number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the part concerning the claim for revocation of the disposition imposing additional dues among the instant lawsuit is legitimate, the Plaintiff sought revocation of the disposition imposing additional dues and aggravated additional dues (i.e., KRW 89,374,340 - KRW 85,71,930) in addition to the disposition imposing global income tax of this case against the Defendant (i.e., KRW 89,374,340 - KRW 85,71,930). However, inasmuch as the additional dues under Article 21 of the National Tax Collection Act are naturally generated pursuant to legal provisions without due process of confirmation by the

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da15482 Decided June 10, 2005). Therefore, the part seeking revocation of the disposition imposing additional dues in the instant lawsuit is unlawful.

3. Whether the imposition of global income tax in this case is lawful

A. The plaintiff 1's summary of the parties' assertion is the Internet.