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

A. The Plaintiff owns 5.5/411 shares among 15.5/41 shares in the B site in Gwangju-si, Gwangju-si (hereinafter “1”) 5.5/41 shares, ② C site 528 square meters in Gwangju-si, ③ D site in Gwangju-si (hereinafter “2”) and ③ 626 square meters in the D site in Gwangju-si (hereinafter “3 land”).

B. The land No. 1 is used as a site for E-owned building; among them, the area used as a housing site is 91.76 square meters, and the area used as a restaurant site is 66.24 square meters.

C. On September 5, 2014, the Defendant imposed property tax of KRW 4,330 and local education tax of KRW 470 on the Plaintiff’s share ratio among KRW 91.76 square meters of the area used as a housing site among the instant land (i.e., KRW 91.76 square meters of KRW 55.5/411) on the Plaintiff on September 5, 2014 (i.e., KRW 91.76 square meters of KRW 4,330 and KRW 470 of the property tax in 2014; and imposed local education tax of KRW 8.95 square meters of the Plaintiff’s share ratio among KRW 66.24 square meters of the area used as a food site among the instant land 1 (i.e., KRW 66.24 square meters of KRW 55.5/411); and of KRW 185.06 square meters of the instant land among the land 3 of this case: property tax of KRW 12626 square meters of KRW 212125/415,2016

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition” for the imposition of property tax of KRW 1,052,290 and local education tax of KRW 154,620 in 2014.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In the instant disposition imposing the property tax, etc. on the land owned by the Plaintiff in the year 2014, the Defendant asserted that the instant disposition was excessively increased compared to the property tax, etc. imposed in the year 2013, and thus, the instant disposition should be revoked as unlawful.

B. Article 106(1) of the Local Tax Act provides that property tax imposed on land shall be subject to general aggregate taxation, special aggregate taxation, and separate taxation.