1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the principal and the Suwon District Court’s branch branch support, including the claims expanded and reduced in this court.

1. The court of first instance partly accepted the plaintiffs' principal lawsuit and the defendant's main lawsuit and the defendant's branch court of Suwon District Court's 2016Gahap2036877, and dismissed the defendant's aforementioned support 2016Gahap203670.

However, among the judgment of the court of first instance, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant appealed against the part of the main claim. Of the judgment of first instance, the Plaintiff and the Defendant appealed or filed an incidental appeal against the part of the counterclaim claim No. 2016Gau 203687 among the judgment of first instance. However, the Defendants did not file an appeal against the part of the counterclaim claim No. 2016Gau203670.

Therefore, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part of the principal lawsuit and to the part of the counterclaim claim No. 2016Gahap203687 (hereinafter referred to as the above counterclaim) rendered by the Suwon District Court (hereinafter referred to as the “Counterclaim”).

2. Basic facts

A. The status of the parties and transactional relationship between the parties, etc. 1) Plaintiff A is a person who operates a flower farm, and Plaintiff B is the children of Plaintiff A, and the Defendant is a person who is engaged in the import business of foreign flowers. 2) The Defendant requested the Plaintiff to arrange the import of foreign flowers, etc. from October 2005, and imported flowers by proxy on behalf of the Plaintiffs. In the process, the Plaintiffs were liable to the Defendant for the obligations under the name of the Defendant, such as the cost of flowers and the cost of import.

3) Meanwhile, Plaintiff A and Plaintiff B were registered as an agricultural business entity’s owner in around 2009 and around March 25, 201 under each “Act on Fostering and Supporting Agricultural and Fisheries Enterprises,” and thereby, the Plaintiffs became entitled to refund the value-added tax paid upon importing foreign flowers pursuant to Article 105-2(1) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act and Articles 6 and 7 of the “Special Cases Concerning the Application of Value-Added Tax Rates and Tax Exemptions, etc. for Machinery, Materials, and Petroleum Products for Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry, and Fishing. 4) The Plaintiffs and the Defendant refund the value-added tax as described in the said paragraph 3.