1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim extended in the trial are all dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit after the appeal are filed.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff as a party is a corporation with the objective of petroleum refining, wholesale and retail sales, etc., and the Defendant is a corporation with the objective of exporting and importing petrochemicals, selling oil, etc.

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant’s transaction (1) from July 8, 2013 to October 10, 2013, the Plaintiff purchased HE (PHevy Ed; hereinafter “instant product”) 2,574,610km from the Defendant on a total of 45 occasions, and paid 1,529,318,340 won (including value-added tax) to the Defendant.

(2) Although the Plaintiff requested the Defendant to issue a tax invoice for the instant product transaction, the Plaintiff discontinued the transaction with the Defendant since the mid-term, October 2013, when the Defendant failed to comply with the request.

C. (1) On January 7, 2014, the Defendant issued a tax invoice with respect to the instant product transaction on December 31, 2013; the supply price of KRW 1,390,289,400; and the tax amount of KRW 139,028,940; and the total amount of KRW 1,529,318,340.

(B) From December 2, 2013 to December 31, 2013, the Defendant issued a revised tax invoice with respect to the supply price of the instant tax invoice -1,390,289,400, tax amount -139,028,940, total amount -1,529,318,340, on the grounds of “cancellation of a contract” on January 9, 2014.

(2) On February 28, 2014, the Defendant: (a) issued a tax invoice on February 28, 2014 on the instant product transaction; (b) the supply price of KRW 1,390,289,40; and (c) the tax amount of KRW 139,028,940; and (b) the total amount of KRW 1,529,318,340; (c) on February 28, 2014; (d) the Plaintiff received refund of KRW 139,028,940 on the instant product.

The plaintiff's input tax amount, etc. (1) The Samsung tax invoice is reissued as above.