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

가. 원고는 이BB에게 000원(이하 '이 사건 대여금'이라 한다)을 대여한 후，이 사건 대여금을 담보하기 위하여 2004. 7. 28. 이BB 소유의 서울 용산구 OOO동 000 대 26㎡와 OOO동 0000 대 433㎡ 중 81/131 지분 및 위 지상 벽돌조 및 목 조스레트지붕 3층 창고 및 근린생활시설 1，2，3층 각 263.39㎡，지하 14.57㎡(이하 '이 사건 부동산'이라 한다)에 관하여 채권최고액이 000원인 근저당권을 설정하였다.

B. The "amount of settlement on the date of April 2005, 2005, prepared by the Plaintiff and the BB (as referred to in subparagraph (4) and (hereinafter referred to as "the settlement of this case") is indicated as the total amount of 00 won (=00 won x5 months) of the loan of this case from December 2004 to April 2005.

C. On April 11, 201, the Defendant, based on the instant settlement statement, deemed that the Plaintiff received a total of 000 won (i.e., KRW 000 KRW 000) from B from January 2005 to April 2005, based on the interest on the instant loan, and determined and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 000 global income tax for the year 2005 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

D. On May 31, 201, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition, caused a request for examination to the Commissioner of the National Tax Service, and the Commissioner of the National Tax Service dismissed the Plaintiff’s request for examination on August 29, 2011.

[Based on recognition] The descriptions of Gap, Eul, Eul, Eul, Eul, Eul, and Eul, and the whole purport of the arguments

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff prepared the settlement statement of this case at around April 2005, while settling the relationship between BB and the partnership business. However, there was no actual payment of interest specified in the settlement statement of this case from BB, and since it did not receive the principal of the loan of this case, the disposition of this case under the premise that the plaintiff was paid interest from B, and the disposition of this case was unlawful.

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Facts of recognition

1) Registration of the instant real estate

A) AB completed the registration of ownership transfer in its name on October 6, 1995 with respect to the instant real estate.

B) After that, the following registration was completed regarding the instant real estate in sequence:

(1) On October 17, 1995, the establishment registration of a mortgage-mortgage AAAA corporation, and the maximum amount of claims 000 won (However, actual loans are KRW 000).

(2) On October 30, 1995, registration of creation of a right to collateral security CCC and credit maximum amount of KRW 000,000.

(3) On June 12, 2002, the establishment registration of a mortgage-backed securities company, DDR, the maximum amount of claims, 000 won.

(4) The registration of creation of a right to collateral security on June 13, 2003, between the plaintiff and the maximum amount of credit amount of KRW 000,000.

(5) Registration of creation of chonsegwon of a person having chonsegwon, Kim H, and lease on a deposit basis on October 16, 2003

(6) On July 1, 2004, registration of the establishment of a right to collateral security with this Chapter, and with a maximum amount of KRW 000 won.

7. Registration of creation of a mortgage on July 28, 2004 between the plaintiff and the highest amount of the credit (the loan in this case)

(8) Registration of a decision on compulsory commencement of auction made on December 24, 2004 by the creditor Park J, Seoul Western District Court 2004tae32561, the Seoul Western District Court 2004

(9) Registration of a voluntary decision on commencement of auction by the creditor, the plaintiff, and the Seoul Western District Court 2005 Ma114, January 10, 2005

C) In that situation, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage was cancelled on April 6, 2005, and the registration of the ownership transfer was completed in the name of the plaintiff on April 18, 2005 on the real estate in this case as of April 4, 2005.

D) After that, the registration of the decision to commence auction was cancelled on June 2, 2005 and on June 15, 2005, respectively. The registration of the registration of the establishment of a mortgage or of the establishment of a right to lease on a deposit basis was cancelled on June 7, 2005, and the registration of the establishment of a right to lease on a deposit basis was cancelled on July 7, 2006.

2) The business relationship between the Plaintiff and the B, etc.

A) On May 28, 2004, thisB made a business agreement with the Plaintiff to use the instant real estate until May 27, 2008, and the Plaintiff paid 400 million won to B as security deposit for the said use, and at the end of June 2005 from April 2004 to May 15, 2005, 2/3 of the profit, and 1/2 of the profit from July 2005 to May 2008, and signed the above contract (Evidence 3) with the purport of allocating 1/2 of the profit to B. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage (Evidence 3) to secure the above security deposit.

B) Around November 2004, this B proposed that the Plaintiff purchase the instant real estate in KRW 000, and the Plaintiff reserved the response thereto.

C) From that point of time, Park J, a creditor of this case, the Plaintiff, and Dong Jae-J, the Dong Jae, filed an application for compulsory auction on December 24, 2004 with the Seoul Western District Court 2004Mo32561, and on January 10, 2005, the Plaintiff, the previous mortgagee, decided to sell the instant real estate to the Plaintiff on April 4, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant sales contract”). With respect to the sales amount, the Plaintiff and Lee Jae-B did not specify as the amount of the sales contract, but did not specify as to the sales amount, the Plaintiff acquired the obligation of this case as security and deducted it from the sales amount.

D) On April 6, 2005, the Plaintiff and the BB prepared the instant settlement statement with the content that the Plaintiff shall pay KRW 000 to the Plaintiff as a result of settlement of interest from December 2004 to April 2005, the amount of allocation of rent for the instant real estate, and deposit money for lease on a deposit basis against the said person having chonsegwon.

E) The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Plaintiff, which was based on sale on April 4, 2005, without paying the purchase price to the BB, as seen earlier on April 18, 2005.

F) The agreement between the Plaintiff and the B on the above business was terminated at the end of April 2005.

[Based on Recognition] The entire purport of Gap's 3, 4, 5, 3, and 4, and 4

D. Determination

In full view of the evidence and the overall purport of the arguments as seen earlier, it is reasonable to view that the following facts and circumstances are comprehensively taken into account, and that the debt 00 won (including the sum of interest 000 won from December 2004 to April 2005 on the loan of this case) under the settlement of accounts of this case was deducted from the purchase price of the real estate of this case, which is to be paid by thisB to the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff’s above assertion on the premise that the Plaintiff did not receive the above interest from thisB is without merit, and the disposition of this case is legitimate.

1) The sum of the collateral security obligations established on the instant real estate at the time of entering into the instant sales contract (i.e., the amount of the collateral security obligations mentioned above + KRW 000 won + (ii) the amount of the collateral security obligations mentioned above + KRW 000 won (3) the amount of the collateral security obligations mentioned above + ④ KRW 000 won the amount of the collateral security obligations mentioned above + (4)00 won the amount of the collateral security obligations mentioned above + (500 won the amount of the collateral security obligations mentioned above, excluding the amount of the collateral security obligations mentioned above. (iii) On the other hand, it was calculated by including the settlement in the instant settlement agreement, and the amount of the collateral security obligations mentioned in the instant settlement statement is KRW 00,000, which is less than the amount of the purchase price set up on the Plaintiff around November 204.

2) 원고와 이BB은 이 사건 매매대금에 관하여 금액으로 특정하지 않고 당시 이BB이 부담하고 있는 채무를 원고가 인수하여 이를 매매대금에서 공제하기로 하였는데，원고와 이BB이 이 사건 매매계약을 체결할 무렵 이 사건 정산서가 작성된 점，이BB은 이 사건 정산서상 채무 000원을 원고에게 별도로 지급하지 않았고，원고 또한 이BB의 채무를 인수하는 것 이외에 이BB에게 매매대금을 별도로 지급하지 않은 상태에서 이 사건 부동산에 관하여 2005. 4. 4.자 매매를 원인으로 한 소유권이전 등기를 마친 점， 이 사건 부동산에 설정된 근저당채무액과 이 사건 정산서상 채무액의 합계액이 당초 이BB이 원고에게 제시한 매매대금과 비슷한 점，비록 원고의 경매신청에 따라 이 사건 부동산에 관한 2005. 2. 1.자 경매법원의 감정가액이 000 원으로 펑가되기는 하였으나， 원고의 근저당권보다 앞서 설정된 근저당권의 채권최고 액 합계액이 000원에 이르러 원고가 경매절차에서 배당받을 경우 자신의 채권을 모두 변제받기는 어려워짐에 따라 원고로서는 손해를 줄이기 위하여 부득이 이QQ이 부담하고 있는 채무를 인수하고 이 사건 부동산을 매수할 수밖에 없었던 것으로 보이는 점 등에 비추어 보면， 원고가 인수하여 매매대금에서 공제한 이BB의 채무는 이 사건 부동산에 설정된 위 근저당채무액 합계 000원뿐만 아니라 이 사건 정산서상 채무 000원도 포함되었다고 봄이 상당하다.

3. Conclusion

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.