1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Since around 2004, the Plaintiff A delegated the tax agency service of the company run by it to D, a certified tax accountant.

The defendant was an employee of the tax accountant office D, who is delegated by the plaintiff A.

B. On April 5, 2010, Plaintiff A entered into a contract with Plaintiff B, who is an ASEAN, with the burden of acquiring the collateral collateral debt of KRW 53 million with respect to the Songpa-gu Seoul apartment F (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and KRW 110 million with respect to the lease deposit obligation, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 6, 2010 with respect to the instant real estate donated to Plaintiff B (hereinafter “instant donation”).

C. At the time of the instant donation, the Defendant: (a) drafted and submitted a tax return under the Plaintiffs’ name on the instant donation upon the Plaintiff’s request; (b) reported only KRW 2.5 million, which is the standard market price, even though the tax base of the instant real estate was reported higher than the standard market price; and (c) on June 30, 2010, Plaintiff A paid KRW 2,210,270, and Plaintiff B paid KRW 1,080,000, respectively.

On May 18, 2015, the tax authority imposed additional taxes of KRW 5,232,927 on May 18, 2015 on Plaintiff A, including additional taxes of KRW 6,245,360 on the aggregate of KRW 489,150,150, the amount deducted from the transfer scheduled tax amount, and the additional taxes of KRW 8,870,740 on Plaintiff B, on the ground that the Plaintiffs underreporting the gift tax and the transfer income tax on the donation of this case.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 7, 19, Eul's 1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion regarding the donation of this case.