1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.

2. The Defendant’s KRW 136,761,290 and as to the Plaintiff, December 14, 2019.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff’s criminal appeal and as a result, the Plaintiff invested in C private teaching institutes established by the Defendant (hereinafter “private teaching institutes of this case”) in around 2003, thereby holding 30% of the shares in the private teaching institutes of this case after investing KRW 200 million.

The Defendant sold the instant private teaching institute, and returned KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff on December 2006, and subsequently, sold the Plaintiff’s shares and established a separate private teaching institute, thereby lowering the Plaintiff’s shares from 30% to 5%, thereby acquiring 25% of the Plaintiff’s shares.

On September 2007, the Defendant sold the above corporate teaching institute and received KRW 10.2 billion with the purchase price, but returned KRW 510 billion equivalent to KRW 50.5 billion with the Defendant’s shares, but embezzled the remainder.

1) The Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant on the following facts around 2009.

2) The police did not have any clear evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s complaint, and sent the Defendant’s statement that only borrowed money from the Plaintiff and did not receive an investment, to the Defendant on the ground that there is no evidence to reverse the Defendant’s statement. The prosecutor rendered a disposition on April 14, 2020 without suspicion.

B. (1) The Seoul Local Tax Service Commissioner received data on revenues and expenses of the instant driving school in 2006 and conducted a tax investigation, and notified the competent authority of taxation by deeming that the total amount of revenues and necessary expenses of the instant driving school were omitted and reported.

2) According to the above notification, the head of the relevant high tax office and the head of the relevant permanent tax office were to rectify and correct the comprehensive income tax for the year 2006, based on the shares of the pertinent private teaching institute on May 15, 2017. On May 19, 2017, the head of the relevant high tax office and the head of the relevant permanent tax office were to rectify and correct 23,418,130 won to the Plaintiff holding 30% shares of the instant private teaching institute, and 23,418,130 won to the Plaintiff holding 10% shares of the instant private teaching institute on May 17, 2017, respectively. The head of the relevant permanent tax office and the head of the relevant permanent resident office owned 50% shares of the instant private teaching institute on May 61, 208.