2...

A. On January 13, 2011, with respect to the land No. 205 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Plaintiff, the ownership transfer registration was completed on January 13, 201 with respect to the land No. 205 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

B. On December 9, 2014, the Trade Union: (a) determined that the Plaintiff violated Article 3 of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”) by way of title trust, even though having purchased the instant real estate with D along with D; and (b) notified the Defendant of such fact.

C. On January 13, 2015, the Defendant imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 32,620,530 on May 11, 2015, based on Articles 3(1) and 5 of the Real Estate Real Name Act, and Article 3-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, etc.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

On July 31, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed, but the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on December 9, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, 9, 12, and 13 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant real estate was acquired by D alone, and the Plaintiff did not have any title trust to D, and thus, the instant disposition issued on a different premise is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes;

C. Article 3(1) of the Real Estate Real Name Act provides that the real right to real estate shall not be registered under the name of the title trustee pursuant to the title trust agreement, and the title truster who violated the obligation to real name registration violates the obligation to submit the documents for transfer to security pursuant to Article 5(1)1 of the Real Estate Real Name Act.