1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s claim that is changed in exchange at the trial is dismissed.

2. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff and the designated parties are entrepreneurs engaging in the business of filling and selling liquefied petroleum gas for vehicle fuel.

The Plaintiff, from March 2010 to August 2012, 2012, from January 201 to December 2010; from January 2010 to December 2012; from the Selection C, from November 2010 to June 2012, 2012, he/she was released from each of the tanks (manufactured petroleum gas transport containers) into a tank manufactured wholesale business entities, after he/she was released from each of the tanks loaded in the tank manufactured wholesale business entities of liquefied petroleum gas; after he/she moved the tank lorri vehicle into the tank wholesale business entity to move the protocol lorri vehicle into the tank installed in the tank manufactured in the tank; and then he/she was injected into the tank manufactured in the tank manufactured in the tank wholesale business entity; and the goods taken out as the tank stored in his/her workplace to the consumer for the purpose of sale as part of the vehicle fuel.

B. From November 1, 2012 to November 20, 2012, the director of the Gwangju Regional Tax Office confirmed the following facts against the Plaintiff and the designated parties, and notified the Defendant that the act of the Plaintiff and the designated parties constituted an act of manufacturing individual consumption tax taxable goods.

C. On July 5, 2013, the Defendant: (a) determined and notified the Plaintiff of the imposition of KRW 128,917,610 as individual consumption tax and education tax (including individual consumption tax; hereinafter “individual consumption tax, etc.”) to the Plaintiff; (b) imposed the imposition of KRW 34,010,210 as to the Selection B; and (c) imposed the imposition of KRW 194,16,150 as to the Selection C.

(hereinafter “each disposition of this case”) D.

The Plaintiff and the designated parties dissatisfied with each of the instant dispositions and filed a petition for an inquiry with the Tax Tribunal on August 22, 2013, but all were dismissed on November 20, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 and 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case is erroneous as follows.