A. On May 10, 198, the Plaintiff started operating the instant real estate leased from C, the owner of the first floor No. 5 of the building B in Yangcheon-gu Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, with the trade name of “D store”.

B. On December 1, 1990, while the Plaintiff engaged in the aforementioned business, he/she acquired and owned the ownership of the instant real estate on August 11, 2014, and reported the transfer income tax to the Defendant with the transfer value of KRW 1,100,000,000, and the acquisition value of KRW 682,00,000.

C. After conducting an on-site investigation with respect to the Plaintiff, the Defendant deemed that KRW 682,00,000, which is the sales price of the instant real estate under the sales contract (Evidence A; hereinafter “instant sales contract”) submitted by the Plaintiff in relation to the acquisition value, falls under a case where it is impossible to verify the actual transaction price at the time of acquisition because it was excessively appropriated, and thus, the acquisition value was determined by the conversion acquisition price based on the standard market price, and accordingly, notified the Plaintiff of KRW 118,170,220, the transfer income tax reverted to the year 2014 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal on June 22, 2016, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed it on December 12, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 through 5, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff submitted the sales contract of this case, certificate of transaction and certificate of personal seal impression, etc. which can prove that the actual transaction price of this case is KRW 682,00,000 at the time of acquiring the real estate, the defendant, without any special circumstance, deemed that the sales contract of this case was prepared differently from the facts, and thereby, imposed the transfer income tax of this case by setting the acquisition price as the conversion price to the conversion price.