1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

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, such as accepting the judgment of the court of first instance, is as follows 2. The relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except to supplement or add the judgment as stated in paragraph (3), and it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (including the attached Form, but excluding the part of “3. conclusion”). Thus, it is acceptable as it is in accordance with Article 8(

2. The amended part 3 to 6-7 pages are as follows:

A person shall be appointed.

F. The Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition on December 6, 2016, but was dismissed on January 11, 2017, and filed an appeal on February 28, 2017, but was dismissed on December 6, 2017.

[Based on the recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 12 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1, and Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings] 6, the 4th day below the 6th day " July 19, 2017" shall be " September 19, 2017". The 7th day "(including branch numbers)" shall be deleted. The following is added to the right side of the 7th day below.

【The background of the above disposition and the 8th 5th 5th son’s “import” are as follows.

【The development project of up to 20 billion won in the future shall import the instant vessel in advance exceeding 4.5 billion won for the development project, and shall not be used for the project for a reasonable period of time】

3. Supplement and addition of judgments;

A. The plaintiff's assertion was imported to use the ship of this case for marina business among the comprehensive leisure business that the plaintiff intended not only to use the ship of this case for FD fishery harbor development business but also to use the ship of this case for marina business.

The Plaintiff, upon filing a preliminary return of the value-added tax for the first time in 2015, declared the value-added tax collected by the import of the instant vessel as an input tax amount not deducted from the output tax amount, in view of the expenditure not directly related to the business.