1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 16, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant, under which the contract was concluded with the Defendant for the construction work of KRW 87,00,00,00 for the 8,9 remodeling construction of the 1st floor hospital, and for the completion construction of the 1st floor hospital on the ground of the 1st floor, the 250,000,000 for the construction cost, and entered into a construction contract with the Defendant for the construction work of KRW 5,00 for the 6th floor seminars room on July 29, 2009.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant construction contract”). B.

In the process of concluding the instant construction contract, the Plaintiff submitted a written estimate to the Defendant stating that “The tax amount at the time of issuance of tax invoices is separate, and 10% separate from the time of issuance of cash receipts or the credit card settlement,” and Article 10 of the instant construction contract provides that “The tax amount at the time of issuance of tax invoices and cash receipts and the credit card settlement shall be separately imposed”

C. After completing the instant construction work on November 2010, the Plaintiff settled the total construction cost of KRW 360,050,000 with the Defendant, taking account of the additional cost, and received the said money from the Defendant.

On December 22, 2011, the Plaintiff received an instruction from the head of the Jeonju District Tax Office to submit explanatory data up to January 6, 2012. On May 29, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a revised return on value-added tax of KRW 36,005,00 with respect to the instant construction contract, and additional tax of KRW 3,605,00 with respect to the failure to report, and accordingly, the value-added tax and additional tax were imposed on the Plaintiff.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 11, and 13 (including the case of additional number), part of Eul 1, and the purport of whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant agreed to bear the value-added tax amount under the instant construction contract. Thus, the Defendant is 36,005, the value-added tax amount imposed on the Plaintiff.