1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From June 1, 2006, Plaintiff A is running a telecom accommodation business with the trade name called Ecom, from the land building of the Mana-gu Manyang-gu D in Manyang-si, Ansan-si.

B. Plaintiffs A and B are South Korea, their mother is Plaintiff C, and their father is F.

Plaintiff

A, B, and F are shareholders of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “G”), and the Plaintiffs and F are shareholders of H Co., Ltd. (the Plaintiff A, B, 19,400 shares in total, and F own 11,200 shares in total). The Plaintiffs and F are shareholders of H Co., Ltd. (the representative director Plaintiff A, hereinafter referred to as “H”).

(F) Of the total issued shares of 9,300 shares, Plaintiff A 3,906 shares, Plaintiff B 2,418 shares, Plaintiff C, and F own shares of 1,488 shares, respectively.

Plaintiff

A and B, as a joint business proprietor on April 9, 2012, leased to G the deposit amount of KRW 850 million (no rent) and the lease period of KRW 12 months, the deposit amount of KRW 2864 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “influent land ①”) in Ansan-gu, Manan-gu, Manan-si, J, and K.

In addition, on March 15, 2012, the Plaintiffs leased the deposit amount of KRW 700 million (no rent) to H as a joint proprietor of the business, and the lease period of 12 months for the deposit amount of KRW 700 million (no rent) and the lease period of 12 months for any project to H.

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant lease”). D.

From 2012 to 2016, the Plaintiffs reported and paid value-added tax to the Defendant on the value of supply of the reasonable rent calculated by multiplying the deposit under the instant lease agreement by the fixed deposit interest rate.

E. From April 13, 2017 to May 2, 2017, the director of the Namcheon District Tax Office: (a) conducted a personal integration investigation for the Plaintiff A for the year 2014; and (b) omitted KRW 135,261,00 in cash sales in relation to the operation of the EM in 2014; and (b) deemed that the Plaintiffs leased the pertinent land to G with a special relationship, etc. for an unreasonably low price and unjustly reduced tax burden, thereby notifying the Defendant of the taxation data.