1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

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

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the parts to be filled or added below, and thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

At the bottom of the second judgment of the first instance, three parallels shall be made as follows.

The value-added tax was reported and paid from the first to the second period from 2001 to the second period from 2008, and the above value-added tax was reported by partners including the plaintiff et al. as joint business operators of the association of this case.

Since then, the Defendant issued a notice of correction of the amount corresponding to the corresponding amount and the amount of tax for correction of the increased amount, and designated the members, including the Plaintiff, as joint and several taxpayers.

The last 3rd parallel of the judgment of the first instance shall be “ July 29, 2014.” The fourth parallel of the fourth parallel of the judgment shall be “ October 23, 2014.” The fourth parallel of the fourth parallel of the court below shall be “ October 23, 2014.” and the fourth parallel of the fourth parallel of the fourth parallel of the fourth parallel to “ March 25, 2015.” respectively.

The five pages of the judgment of the court of first instance are replaced by the content of “related Acts and subordinate statutes.” as shown in attached Table 2 of this judgment.

The following shall be added to the 7th day of the first instance judgment, 11th day of the 11st day.

The defendant asserts that the judgment of an administrative case does not fall under the "judgment" under Article 45-2 (2) 1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, and only the judgment of a civil case falls under the "judgment". However, Article 45-2 (2) 1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes only stipulates that a "judgment" is "judgment" without specifying the type of litigation on the grounds of a subsequent request for correction, and even in a case of an administrative or criminal case, the transaction or act, etc. which served as the basis of calculating the tax base and the amount of tax, has been faithfully disputed in the trial process and accordingly becomes final and conclusive as a different transaction or act through a judgment, the "judgment" under Article 45-2