1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Although the same subject-matter of lawsuit has been filed with the parties differently, if the previous suit has not been extinguished due to withdrawal or rejection, etc. by the time the closing of argument in the subsequent suit, the subsequent suit is unlawful as it constitutes a overlapping lawsuit.

The criteria for determining a previous suit and a subsequent suit are followed by the prior suit and the criteria for identifying a previous suit and subsequent suit are followed after the date of the occurrence of the lawsuit, and where there is an additional change in the lawsuit, the effect of the continuation of the lawsuit added shall take effect when the document is served on the other party or is delivered on the date of pleading.

(2) The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for revocation of value-added tax, etc. (hereinafter “pre-appeal of this case”) on July 16, 2014 on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff, or the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for revocation, such as the imposition of value-added tax, etc. (hereinafter “pre-appeal of this case”) with the lower court on October 15, 2013; (b) the Plaintiff sought revocation of the disposition for revocation of the second-year value-added tax 527,094,150 won, which was issued against the Plaintiff on December 16, 2014; and (c) the Plaintiff sought revocation of the disposition for revocation of the disposition for revocation of the disposition for revocation of value-added tax 5,00 won on the following grounds: (a) the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for revocation of the disposition for revocation of the previous disposition for revocation of the disposition for revocation of value-added tax 205,000 won on the Defendant on December 16, 2014.