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

A. On September 10, 2002, the Plaintiff was indicted for violating the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name, including the facts charged that the Plaintiff had completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name AAA under a title trust agreement with the Plaintiff’s father, and was sentenced to a judgment of one year of suspended execution in the Suwon District Court on October 206, 206. The Plaintiff was sentenced to a judgment of dismissal of the appeal by the appellate court on June, 200, and the said judgment became final and conclusive at that time.

B. On January 17, 2008, the Plaintiff completed the transfer of ownership, etc. on the instant land on the grounds of inheritance. The instant land was sold through voluntary auction on June 30, 2008, and the transfer registration of ownership was completed in the DDR in July 10, 2008.

C. From September 3, 2012 to September 21, 2012, the Defendant conducted a field investigation on the Plaintiff’s capital gains tax, and on December 1, 2012, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 111,111,11 of the capital gains tax for the year 2008 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 11, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The instant disposition is unlawful for the following reasons.

1) Upon the recommendation of EE, the Plaintiff and six other persons jointly invest the factory site development fund.

In accordance with an agreement on October 8, 2005, when the land of this case, which is part of the factory site, was transferred under the name of AA for the purpose of transferring the principal and interest of investment, was actually acquired by the plaintiff and six others on or around February 28, 2006. The acquisition value of the land of this case should be calculated according to the shares of the plaintiff and joint investors based on the amount of KRW 455,960,000, which is the actual amount invested by joint investors.

2) The Plaintiff obtained a building permit to divert the land of this case for the purpose of civil engineering.

In the course of the preparation of design drawings, cutting, and mination work, enormous expenses have been disbursed, and the cost of creating a legally alternative forest has been paid, so such cost shall be deducted from the necessary expenses.

3) Under the judgment that the transfer margin of the instant land is not significant for each group of investors, the transfer margin of the instant land is determined as follows.

The plaintiff treated it as inheritance from AA, a nominal owner, and even if the plaintiff's act did not evade taxes by fraud or other improper means for the purpose of evading taxes, the plaintiff imposed an unfair under-reported penalty tax.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

1) Whether the instant land was substantially acquired around February 2006 as the joint-owned property of the Plaintiff and six joint investors

(A) in an administrative litigation, not bound by facts recognized in a criminal trial;

In light of other evidence submitted in the administrative trial, barring any special circumstance, it cannot be recognized that it is difficult to adopt a factual judgment in light of the fact-finding process, barring any special circumstance.

B) Regarding the instant case, Nos. 5, 8, 9, and 14-1, 2, and 6

The following circumstances, i.e., evidence, including evidence Nos. 1, 2, 7, 9, and 10 of evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings, are acknowledged as having been based on the overall purport of the pleading, namely, ① the Plaintiff was convicted of having committed a crime that entrusted the instant land in the name of AA, and the judgment became final and conclusive;

② EEE은 수사기관에서 자신이 이 사건 토지를 포함하여 화산리 일대의 토지를 매입하여 공장부지 조성사업을 추진하는 과정에서 개발비용이 부족하여 원고와 사이에사업자금 ^^억 원을 투자받기로 하되 투자이익 배당금으로 6억 6천만 원을 지급하기로 하였는데, 사업부지 중 이 사건 토지에 관하여는 원고가 자신 명의로 소유권이전등기를 하고 싶다고 하여 원고로 하여금 이 사건 토지를 BBB으로부터 매입하도록 주선하였고, 그 매매대금은 원고가 박춘필 등으로부터 투자를 받아 충당한 것으로 알고있다고 진술하였던 점, ③ 원고는 GGG으로부터 이 사건 토지를 매매대금 263,000,000원에 취득하였는데, 계약금은 물론 중도금 1억 원 및 잔금 136,700,000원도 원고가 지급하였거나 다른 사람으로부터 차용하여 지급한 것으로 보이는 점, ④ EEE이 이 사건토지를 실질적으로 취득한 사실을 인정할 증거가 없을 뿐만 아니라 원고와 EEE 사이에 명시적인 양도담보약정이 체결된 바 없으므로, EEE이 이를 원고에게 양도담보로 제공하였다거나 이 사건 토지를 처분할 권한까지 가지고 있었다고 보기 어려운 점(오히려 원고는 EEE에 대한 투자금채권을 확보하기 위하여 EEE이 제대로 된 공장부지 조성사업을 위해 반드시 매입이 필요했던 이 사건 토지를 자신 명의로 취득하여 안전장치를 마련하고자 했던 것으로 보인다), ⑤ EEE의 부탁으로 이 사건 토지의매매를 주선하였던 중개인인 이명환도 수사기관에서 EEE이 이 사건 토지의 실제 매수인은 원고라고 하여 원고를 매수인으로 한 매매계약서를 작성하였다고 진술하였던점, ⑥ 형사판결문(수원지방법원 2006노3690호)에도 원고가 투자금 지급의 일환으로사업부지 중 일부인 이 사건 토지를 직접 매수하기로 하면서 매매계약서상의 계약당사 명의를 아버지인 AAA로 하여 매매계약을 체결한 후 다른 사람으로부터 차용한금원 등으로 매매대금을 지급하고 AAA 명의로 소유권이전등기를 경료하였다고 설시되어 있는 점, ⑦ 원고와 매수자금을 제공한 제3자들 사이에 이 사건 토지에 관한 내부적인 지분에 관하여 합의를 한 적 있다 하더라도, 이는 원고와 제3자들 사이의 내부적인 법률관계에 불과한데다가, 원고는 애초에 이 사건 부동산을 아버지 명의로 소유 이전등기를 하는 과정에서 이를 제3자들에게 전혀 알리지도 않았고 지분별로 배분하지도 않았던 점 등을 종합하면, 원고는 매매대금 263,000,000원을 지급한 후 이 사건토지에 관하여 AAA 명의로 소유권이전등기를 마칠 당시 원고의 단독소유로 취득하였다고 봄이 상당하므로, 이와 다른 전제에서 이 사건 토지의 취득가액을 산정하여야한다는 원고의 주장은 받아들일 수 없다.

2) Whether necessary expenses are calculated

A) The burden of proving that the tax base is the basis of taxation in a lawsuit seeking the revocation of a disposition of income tax.

Since the tax base is at the tax authority, as income and necessary expenses are deducted from income, the tax authority shall bear the burden of proving income and necessary expenses in principle. However, since most of the facts causing necessary expenses are in the territory under the control of the taxpayer, and it is difficult for the tax authority to prove it, considering the difficulty of proof, equity between the parties, etc., it is reasonable to recognize the necessity of proof for the taxpayer (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Du16137, Oct. 26, 2007). Meanwhile, the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9897, Dec. 31, 2009); Article 97(1)2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22034, Feb. 18, 2010) and Article 163(3)3 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 2034, Feb. 18, 2010).

B) As to the instant case, Gap evidence 6, Gap evidence 7-1, 2, and appraiser FF

In other words, the aforementioned evidence, including the result of the appraisal of construction cost, and a multi-level situation recognized by the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., the Plaintiff asserted that KRW 17,607,500 for expenses incurred in creating forest replacement resources according to permission for conversion of mountainous district was paid by EE, etc., and the Plaintiff did not submit data that the Plaintiff paid the above expenses. ② According to the appraiser FF’s appraisal of construction cost, in the process of building the instant land into a factory site, the Plaintiff is deemed to have generated 33,917,129 for expenses incurred in surveying, designing, soil construction, etc., but the above construction cost is deemed to have been paid by EE, etc., other than the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have actually spent the above expenses solely on the ground that EE was conducted, unless there is a proof that the said construction cost was settled between EE and the Plaintiff.

3) Whether it is subject to an illegal under-reported penalty tax

A) Article 47-2 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 9911, Jan. 1, 2010)

(2) Articles 47-3 (1) and (2) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the National Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22038, Feb. 18, 2010) provides that an amount equivalent to 10/100 of the amount calculated by multiplying the ratio of the amount equivalent to the underreported tax base to the tax base by the calculated tax amount shall be added to the payable tax amount. In a case where there is a tax base underreporting in an unjust manner, an amount equivalent to 40/100 of the amount calculated by multiplying the calculated tax amount by the ratio of the amount of the unlawfully underreported tax base to the tax base shall be added to the amount equivalent to 40/100. The above provision provides that the method is prescribed by Presidential Decree as a violation of the duty to report the tax base or the amount of national tax, on the basis that a taxpayer conceals or disguises all or part of the fact that serves as the basis for calculating the tax base or the amount of tax, or that a taxpayer violates the duty to report the tax base or the amount of national tax.

In light of the purport of the provision of this Act, Article 47-3(2) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes provides that the imposition and collection of taxes is impossible or remarkably difficult in cases where a person liable for duty payment conceals all or part of a fact that serves as the basis for calculating the tax base or the amount of national taxes, and thus, a sanction to impose a tax rate much higher than the case of a general underreporting that is not based on the "unfair method" is intended to induce the person liable for duty payment to faithfully report the tax base. In addition, Article 27(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes provides that the case where the case can be seen as an "unfair method" requires the purpose of national tax evasion, etc. in order to constitute "unfair method" under Article 47-3(2)1 of the former Framework Act on National Taxes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Du13281, Jan. 26, 201).

B) We examine the instant case, based on the aforementioned evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings.

In other words, the following circumstances are determined: ① (a) the Plaintiff maintained the title trust status until the death of the Plaintiff even after being subject to criminal punishment on the premise that the Plaintiff acquired the instant land under the name of AA, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land due to the inheritance that was made on January 17, 2008; (b) the Plaintiff intentionally evaded capital gains tax by intentionally reporting the acquisition value of the instant land at the same time as the transfer value of the instant land upon voluntary auction; (c) comprehensively taking account of the following: (a) the Plaintiff’s act is deemed to fall under the fraudulent evidence or false document prepared under Article 27(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (title 2); (b) concealing or profit-making profits from the instant land; (d) manipulation or concealment of transactions (subparagraph 5) other national taxes; or (e) fraud or other unlawful act (title 6) to obtain a refund or deduction.

4) Therefore, the Defendant’s instant disposition is lawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

Related Acts and subordinate statutes

(1) The former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9897 of Dec. 31, 2009)

Article 97 (Calculation of Necessary Expenses in Transfer Income) (1) In calculating gains on transfer by a resident, deduction from the transfer value.

Necessary expenses to be incurred shall be the following:

1. Acquisition value:

(a) The actual transaction price required for the acquisition of assets under subparagraphs of Article 94 (1): Provided, That other than those under subparagraphs of Article 96 (2);

In cases falling under the text of this Article, the standard market price at the time of acquisition

(b) In cases falling under item (a), the President where it is impossible to confirm the actual transaction price at the time of acquisition.

(1) Value of transaction example, appraisal value or conversion value determined by Ordinance;

2. Capital expenses, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree;

4. Transfer expenses, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree.

(1) The former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22034, Feb. 18, 2010)

Article 163 (Necessary Expenses for Transferred Assets) (1) The field required for acquisition under the main sentence of Article 97 (1) 1 (a) of the Act

The term "transaction price" means the sum of the following amounts:

1. Values correspond to the cost for acquisition computed by applying mutatis mutandisArticle 89 (1) (Article 89 (2) 1);

(including the discounted debt estimated by the present value under the provisions, but excluding the amount exceeding the market price under unfair calculation)

2. Lawsuit directly used for securing the ownership, etc. of an asset for which a lawsuit on acquisition is filed;

Expenses incurred in calculating each income amount of the year paid, such as expenses for transmission and reconciliation.

amounts other than those included in the

3. In applying subparagraph 1, the cost for acquisition under the method for payment under the agreement between the parties concerned;

Where the transaction amount is determined by adding an amount equivalent to the transaction amount, the amount equivalent to the relevant interest shall be included in the acquisition cost.

amount equivalent to the interest accrued additionally due to the delay in payment of the transaction price under the original agreement;

shall not be included in the cost of acquisition.

(3) The term "capital expenditure, etc. prescribed by Presidential Decree" in Article 97 (1) 2 means the following:

The term "those" means those falling under any of the following subparagraphs:

3. Expenses paid for the alteration, improvement or convenience of the use of transferred assets;

- 11 -

(1) The former Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Act No. 9911, Jan. 1, 2010)

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), it shall be based on the fact that the taxpayer conceals or disguises all or part of the fact which forms the basis of calculating the tax base or amount of national taxes.

manner prescribed by the Presidential Decree which violates the duty to report the tax base or amount of national tax.

(c) The Value-Added Tax Act in cases of value-added tax; hereafter the same shall apply in this Section);

The tax base under Articles 17 and 26 (2); hereinafter the same shall apply in this Section.

c)if any, the aggregate of the following amounts shall be added to the payable tax or refundable:

The tax amount shall be deducted.

Article 47-3 (Penalty Taxes for Underreporting) (1) A taxpayer (excluding an exemption from liability for tax payment under Article 29 of the Value-Adde

excluding those who have filed a tax base return under tax-related Acts within the statutory due date of return.

If the tax base falls short of the tax base to be reported under tax laws, the underreported tax base award;

10/100 of the amount calculated by multiplying the calculated tax amount by the ratio of the reasonable amount to the tax base;

amount to be paid (hereinafter in this paragraph, the amount of general under-reported penalty tax) shall be added to or refunded to such amount.

It shall be deducted from the amount of tax to be paid: Provided, That the head of the competent tax office shall correct it pursuant to the proviso to Article 17-2 (3)

Cases prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as cases, shall not apply.

(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (1), if there exists a tax base for underreporting by unjust means, the following:

The sum of the amounts under the following subparagraphs shall be added to or deducted from the amount of tax payable:

1. The amount of penalty tax for under-reported tax base by improper means: The tax base by improper means; and

An amount equivalent to the tax base reported by the corporation (hereafter in this paragraph, referred to as an “unfairly underreported tax base”) shall be taxed.

amount equivalent to 40/100 of the amount calculated by multiplying the ratio occupied in the standard by the calculated tax

under this subsection, the amount of penalty tax for unlawful underreporting: Provided, That a person subject to double-entry bookkeeping or a corporation has filed a report;

Income tax base or law to be reported under tax-related Acts;

If it falls short of the tax base for royalties, the penalty tax for unlawful underreporting and the underreporting tax table by unjust means;

(1) multiplied by 14/10,000 of the revenue amount related to the corresponding (hereafter in this Article, referred to as "illegally underreported revenue amount")

shall be the larger of the amounts so calculated.

(4) Matters necessary for imposing additional tax for underreporting, such as calculation of an unjustly underreported amount of income, shall be the President.

Colonel shall be prescribed by Ordinance.

(1) The former Enforcement Decree of the Framework Act on National Taxes (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22038, Feb. 18, 2010)

Article 27 (Penalty Taxes for Non-Filing) (1) A person obliged to book by double-entry as prescribed by the Presidential Decree.

(d) The term "resident who has income from real estate rental or business income and is in accordance with Article 160 (3) of the Income Tax Act;

A person subject to double-entry bookkeeping.

(2) The term "manner prescribed by Presidential Decree" in the main body of Article 47-2 (2) of the Act means the following manners:

means any method that falls under any one.

1. Making a false entry in books, such as double entry;

2. Preparation of false evidence or false documents (hereafter in this Article, referred to as false evidence or other evidence);

3. Receipt of false evidence (limited to receipt knowing that it is false).

4. Destruction of books and records;

5. Concealment of property, or fabrication or concealment of income, profits, acts or transactions;

6. Other unlawful acts such as evading national taxes, obtaining a refund or deduction.

Article 27-2 (Additional Tax for Underreporting) (1) In applying Article 47-3 of the Act, the underreported tax base shall be under-reported.

The difference between the tax base to be reported and the tax base reported by the taxpayer shall be limited.

tax base of income tax or corporate tax shall be reported as deficit or refundable as tax base of value-added tax;

If the return is filed, the underreported tax base shall cause no deficit or refund;

shall be calculated on the basis of reference.

(2) Where the proviso to Article 47-3 (2) 1 of the Act is applied, any wrongfully underreported income amount shall be under subparagraphs of Article 27 (2).

The sum of the underreported revenue amount shall be calculated by an unjust method under each subparagraph.