The registration of establishment was completed.

(10) Ad hoc Newcom No. 0000 on March 15, 2004, b. 201, 201-22

the maximum debt amount of 225,00,000 won due to the contract to establish the contract on March 12, 2004, and the debtoryj, the period of service

The registration of creation of a new mortgage in each area of the mortgagee new zone was completed.

(11) Pbs No. 0000 of bbbb, 201, 201-22 on May 11, 2004

On May 6, 2004, the maximum amount of claims arising from the contract to establish a contract is KRW 60,000, the debtoryj, the mortgagee of a mortgage.

The registration of the establishment of each existing establishment of security by UbS has been completed.

(12) Ubs may provide 00 assistance with respect to the shares of ley in Bbb 201, 201-22

15. 50,000 won for a contract to establish a contract as of July 15, 2004, the maximum debt amount of which is 50,000 won;

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

On December 1, 2011, the former Defendant issued a disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 64,864,140 to the Plaintiff on December 1, 2004.

A. The plaintiff and Mayy, the former husband of the plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff et al.") omitted 201, 201, 201-22, 201-27, and 201-28 each of 1/2 shares (the sum of 1/2 shares in the plaintiff's name among the land of the above 4 parcels plus 1/40 shares) in Daejeon District Court 00 (hereinafter referred to as "00 shares") with 37598 on October 28, 198 and 00 shares (hereinafter referred to as "the plaintiff et al.") on October 16, 198, 200 '0 '0 ',00 ',00 ',00 ',00 ',00', and 'bbb' only' 'b' 'b' '201, 37/497 '49/197 shares among the plaintiff's shares received 49.

C. Of BB 201-27, 201-28, the Plaintiff et al. completed each share transfer registration on November 10, 2006 with respect to each share of 1/2 of 606/694 among the shares of bb 201-27, 201-28, as the receipt of 86642 on September 18, 2008.

D. The plaintiff et al. completed the registration of the transfer of co-owner's share of 1/2 of BB 201 and 201-22 as of November 30, 2009, No. 10381, March 12, 2004, on the ground of sale to hh (after the change to Hh), the plaintiff et al. completed the registration of the transfer of co-owner's share of 1/2 of b.

E. On March 12, 2004, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff transferred the instant real estate from the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff and one other on March 12, 2004 (hereinafter “transfer from the Plaintiff on the instant real estate”); (b) on December 1, 201, the Defendant issued a disposition of imposition of KRW 120,420,850 (the final tax amount of KRW 95,216,936, additional tax of KRW 9,521,693, additional tax of KRW 15,682,29, and additional tax of KRW 29,000 for the failure to report (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

F. The Defendant revised the penalty tax amount of KRW 11,390,047, and accordingly, the total amount of the final tax amount of KRW 116,128,676 (the same shall apply to the final tax amount and the penalty tax for insincere faith in filing a return), deducted the amount of tax voluntarily paid by the Plaintiff from KRW 51,264,530, and on January 27, 2012, the Defendant rendered a decision to dismiss the instant disposition of KRW 64,864,140,140 for the transfer of the instant case to the Plaintiff in KRW 164,864,140 for the income tax of KRW 164,864,140 for the transfer of the instant case in 204 (and less than KRW 10), = 116,128,676 - 51,264,530 for the tax payment (hereinafter referred to as the “instant disposition”). On August 27, 2012>

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that there is no dispute between the parties, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1-1, Eul evidence 15, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) The instant real estate owned by the Plaintiff is exchanged with real estate owned on July 19, 202.

(2) Since the above real estate exchange is a mere real estate exchange without undergoing appraisal procedures, the transfer margin of the instant real estate should be calculated based on the standard market price.

(3) The Plaintiff transferred the instant real estate to the Plaintiff on July 24, 2002 (the date of the settlement of the remaining amount), and the Plaintiff did not file a final return on capital gains tax by the statutory due date of return. As such, the exclusion period of imposition of capital gains tax on the transfer of the instant real estate is on May 31, 2010, seven years from the date when the statutory due date of return expires, and the Defendant issued the instant initial disposition to the Plaintiff on December 1, 201, and thus, the exclusion period of imposition of national taxes is excessively null and void.

The following facts may be acknowledged if each of the above evidence showed Gap evidence 2 through 5 (including each of the above numbers), Eul evidence 1 through 3, and 5 through 14.

(1) Hask completed each registration of transfer of ownership based on sale on June 9, 1997, No. 16907, No. 16907, May 31, 1997, with respect to the Suwon District Court’s sk’s sk’s sk’s sk’s sk’s 252-60 and its ground buildings (sk’s 6th floor of steel reinforced concrete slve roof, neighborhood accommodation, one’s sk’s sk’s sk’s sk’).

(2) On July 19, 2002, the Plaintiff et al. entered into a real estate exchange agreement (Evidence 2-1-1-2 of the A) with the terms of a real estate exchange agreement with the Plaintiff et al. (hereinafter referred to as “the exchange agreement with the Plaintiff et al.”) under which the Plaintiff et al. will take over the “loan and Loan” of real estate owned by the Plaintiff et al. and pay the difference of KRW 120,000 won to the Plaintiff et al. (hereinafter referred to as “the exchange agreement with the Plaintiff et al.”) on the share of bb. 201, 201-22, 201-19, 606/694 (the 611/694 will be deemed to be a clerical error).

(3) Of Hask bb 201, 201-22, 201-27, the provisional registration of the right to claim transfer of all shares on August 28, 2002, No. 7150, 7151, which was received on August 28, 2002, as the receipt of August 28, 2002, which was based on trade reservation (hereinafter “the provisional registration of this case”) was completed.

(4) On October 1, 2002, Yy on behalf of Yy prepared a real estate exchange contract (Evidence 3-1) with the content that between sss will exchange one ownership with 00:00 Do 252-60, and 00 Do 00,000 Do 00,000 Do 189 (Provided, That the ss did not complete the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the above 00 Ri 189 land, and at the time the owner on the register was Myj) and the real estate exchange contract with the content that would pay 270,000,000 won due to the above exchange by ssss.

(5) skss completed the registration of transfer of ownership with sk’s registry office sk’s receipt of October 10, 2002 and sk’s receipt of 3468 on September 9, 2002 with sk’s sk’s 00:00 00 252-60, and its ground buildings. (6) sky completed the registration of transfer of ownership with 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 , 189532 on October 1, 2002.

(7) The provisional registration of this case was cancelled on March 10, 2004 as the receipt No. 0000, 000, March 10, 2004, respectively, due to the cancellation on March 10, 2004.

(8) On March 10, 2004, the Plaintiff et al. prepared a sales contract (Evidence No. 2) that sells the instant real estate to sh and yj for KRW 1,030,000,000 in the purchase price, and the headds signed and sealed the said sales contract as a observer.

(9) The National Federation of 000 Cooperatives (hereinafter referred to as the "CF") shall provide b.201,201-22 of the b.b.201,201-22 with 000,000,000 as of March 10, 2004, the maximum debt amount of 876,000,000 won as the basis of the contract to establish a contract on March 10, 2004, and the debtor YYj and the debtor YYN as the NAC.

(13) The registration of ownership transfer as § 2005Kahap000 with respect to bbb 201-22

The provisional disposition on April 27, 2005, which prohibits the disposal of the right to claim as the right to be preserved, has been taken against the above real estate.

The registration was entered.

(14) Sypty and Ech shall receive 00 June 14, 2005 with respect to BB 201, 201-22

No. 0000 on June 14, 2005, the maximum debt amount of 1.1 billion won on the ground of the contract to establish a contract, and the debtoryj;

The establishment registration of a new mortgage has been completed by Ems, Ems, Embrehys, and Sch.

(15) Songmj was received on June 15, 2007, No. 00000 for bbb 201, 201-22

on June 15, 2007, the maximum amount of claims for establishing a contract shall be KRW 150,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

The registration of creation of a mortgage on each part of the mortgagee is completed.

(16) Boyj and Leems on February 28, 2008 bb. 201, 201-22, 201-51, 52;

56 Preparation and issuance of a written confirmation(No. 7) that he/she will be responsible for the capital gains tax on 56.

(17) Of BB 201-27, 201-28, as regards the share of the Plaintiff and leyy (each 606/694)

00 Assistance No. 0000 of February 29, 2008, the maximum amount of claims arising from the contract to establish a contract on February 29, 2008

20 million won, debtor ley, and mortgage-backed security establishment registration is completed.

(18) The registration of provisional disposition in the name of theyj as described in paragraph (13) above was received on March 4, 2008.

From 000 to 000, the cancellation was caused by the cancellation on February 29, 2008.

(19) On August 6, 2008, the plaintiff et al. as the respondent on August 6, 2008 00 support 2008 self-00

208 bb. 201-27 September 2, 2008 between the plaintiff et al.;

Of 201-28 on November 10, 2006, 303/694 shares of the Plaintiff et al. and b01-51, 52

Settlement (hereinafter referred to as the "Reconciliation") to implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration due to sale

The next reconciliation was established.

(20) On February 26, 2009, bb. 201, 201-22, 56 to the plaintiff et al. on February 26, 2009

27. Change of debtor with respect to bank loans while changing the ownership thereof by moving to the file telephone system.

A written statement (No. 7) stating that the change of ownership shall be the same, was prepared and issued.

(21) On August 18, 2009, sh Co., Ltd. as the respondent on August 18, 2009

under this title, and between sh representative directoryj and the plaintiff, etc.

With respect to b/Dong 201, 201-22, 201-56 September 3, 2009 on March 12, 2004

Reconciliation (hereinafter referred to as the "second Reconciliation of this case") to implement the procedure for registration of ownership transfer.

was established.

(22) On June 20, 2011, the Plaintiff received on June 20, 201 from yy registration office with respect to 00 - 0 - - 0 - - 189

On June 4, 201, 000, the registration of ownership transfer was completed based on the division of property.

C. Determination

(1) Since the tax authority bears the burden of proving the legality of taxation, the taxpayer is liable for taxation.

In the case of disputing the credibility of documents, etc. on the basis of the disposition, the court shall have jurisdiction over the above documents, etc.

Based on the credibility of the taxation disposition, it is necessary to determine the legitimacy of the taxation disposition (Supreme Court January 1, 1987).

20. Judgment 85Nu887

(2) Generally presumed the facts in a lawsuit seeking revocation of disposition imposing tax

In the end, the other party cannot be eligible for the application of the empirical rule.

of this section, unless it is proved that the taxation disposition does not meet the taxation requirements.

It cannot be readily concluded (Supreme Court Decision 2003Du14284 Decided April 27, 2004).

(3) Determination as to whether the subject of the instant disposition (i.e., the transfer of this case) exists

The following circumstances revealed in the record as found above:

(A) The real estate of this case claimed by the Plaintiff as the other party to the exchange contract of this case

(not exchanged) The provisional registration of this case has been made on the basis of a pre-sale promise.

(B) On the basis of the provisional registration of this case, the principal registration of transfer of ownership has been completed with respect to the instant real estate.

The provisional registration of this case was cancelled on March 10, 2004 (the plaintiff) and was cancelled on the ground of cancellation on March 10, 2004

Hadar that there was a receipt of settlement money under the exchange contract of this case from the Hadar rights

The above settlement amount is only the subject of restitution following the cancellation of the exchange contract, and the effect of cancellation.

have no effect on)

(C) Transfer income tax is levied on the assumption that the assets are transferred and the income accrued therefrom.

That is, if the sales contract is terminated, the effect of the sales contract shall be lost, and the transfer of assets shall be invalidated.

Inasmuch as the transfer of assets, which is a taxation requirement of transfer income tax, is not performed, it is deemed that there was a transfer of assets

could not be used (Supreme Court Decision 92Nu9944 delivered on December 22, 1992), and the exchange of this case asserted by the Plaintiff

If the contract was rescinded on March 10, 2004 as above, it cannot be deemed that the assets are transferred by the real right effect of the so-called rescission, and it cannot be deemed as subject to capital gains tax.

(D) In preparing a sales contract for the certificate No. 2 attached to the Plaintiff, etc., KRW 1.03 million in the purchase price

50 million won of down payment, part payments 360 million won (banking loans) and the remainder 60 million won

In light of the fact that each statement is divided into KRW 20 million (the sales contract of KRW 5,50,000,000,000,000,000,000 won for a contract deposit, the intermediate payment of KRW 3,60,000,000,000, and KRW 13,000,000,000,000 for an intermediate payment of KRW 5,550,000,00,000 for a contract deposit, and the intermediate payment of KRW 3,000,00,000,000,000 are different from the details of a general sales contract, such as the intermediate payment of KRW 3,00,00,00,000,000,00 for the part payment of the purchase price for the transfer of this case as indicated by the evidence No. 2 of subparagraph (B) and the authenticity of

(E) bb. 201 and 201-22, the location of the real property listed in the evidence No. 3 of Section B, approximately 1,248 square meters

The number of the above real estate and its size are inconsistent with the real estate of this case.

(F) On April 14, 2005 and May 17, 2005, 2005, the plaintiff et al. and one person on two occasions.

Transfer income tax on the amount obtained by deducting the purchase price at the time from the price shall be borne by one person, not

of such content-certified mail, and the plaintiff in the above content-certified mail.

Sale at KRW 50,00,00,000 for b. B. 201 and 201-222 to one person from February 2, 2004.

The transfer of this case by the plaintiff, etc. is self-founded (the transfer of this case through the content-certified mail).

its own recognition of the existence)

(G) In applying for the second compromise of this case by Sh Co., Ltd., the applicant’s “in the cause of the application”

The purchase price for the instant real estate between the Plaintiff, etc. on March 12, 2004 is one billion won with respect to the instant real estate.

The sales contract was concluded and the sales price was paid in full. The plaintiff et al. stated as above.

A settlement is formed without dispute with the corporation prior to the same cause of the application (civil action)

According to Article 220 of the Act, when a compromise, waiver or recognition of a claim is written in the pleading protocol and preparatory date preparation protocol.

such protocol shall have the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment)

(h) The instant case between the Plaintiff, etc., for which the astronomicalj and ms written evidence No. 7 (written confirmation) was prepared

It is premised on the existence of transfer.

(i) evidence No. 8 (W.C.) of the Yj (Y.C. 1 and sh representative directoryj)

In preparation, the above real estate (bb.201, 201-22, 56) on March 12, 2004

under section 88(2)(3)(3)(3)(4)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2

and delivered to the plaintiff, etc.

(j) bb 201 201 and 201-22 upon request of ky’s creditor

The defects, ley, ms, and ms that the twoms ( husbands of Yj) will purchase while the buyer is colored;

Korea-do 3 persons are only a real estate brokerage office located in Gangnam-do on December 2003, or a real estate sales contract is made.

See evidence No. 12 (see evidence No. 12) that it was alleged that it was made, and in this process, the right to the bar shall be deemed to have not been involved).

(k) One claim that the plaintiff is the other party to the exchange contract of this case and yj in the record.

There is no evidence to acknowledge the transactional relationship between the parties (the plaintiff has acquired the real property of this case)

Then, the transfer of this case is asserted to the effect that the transfer of this case was done in the state of non-registration.

In the process, there is no obligation or demand for the performance of rights by the Yj, etc.

(l) One of the records is entitled to any right under the instant exchange agreement asserted by the Plaintiff.

It is impossible to confirm whether it was acquired or not.

(m) Meanwhile, the fact that the witness sss denies the existence of an exchange contract between Hashes and Hashes, etc.

In full view of B, the existence of the transfer of this case subject to the disposition of this case is sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, even if each evidence of the plaintiff's submission is not sufficient to acknowledge the formation of the exchange contract of this case, or the exchange contract of this case is concluded by the plaintiff, the above exchange contract of this case is concluded.

A new real estate of this case between the plaintiff, etc. and yj around 2004.

The disposition of this case premised on the existence of the transfer of this case shall be deemed to have been concluded.

§ 302.

(4) Meanwhile, the witness Hayy’s testimony that corresponds to the Plaintiff’s assertion is the whole of the Plaintiff.

Pursuant to Article 324 of the Civil Procedure Act, a witness may refuse to take an oath when he is examined on matters which have significant interests with himself or a person referred to in any subparagraph of Article 314 of the same Act (the relative of the witness or the person who was in such relation).

Before the pleading renewal, the judge did not notify the witness ley of the right to refuse to take an oath, but refused to take an oath.

In case a witness gives testimony without refusing to take an oath, the presiding judge shall

It cannot be said that there was an error by failing to notify that there was an illegal act (Supreme Court Order April 30, 1971).

71Da452) Other evidence submitted by the Plaintiff does not believe that it is not trustable by the court, or that it is not trustable by the court.

shall not interfere with recognition.

(5) Determination on the Do and argument of the exclusion period of imposition

According to the above, the subject of the disposition of this case is the transferor of this case, and the plaintiff transferred this case.

Since the period for exclusion from imposition of national taxes on the transfer of this case is ten years as stipulated in Article 26-2 (1) 1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, since the period for exclusion from imposition of national taxes on the transfer of this case is ten years as stipulated in Article 26-2 (1) 1 of the Framework Act on National Taxes, the plaintiff's assertion on this part is without merit.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit.