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

(2) On October 25, 2010, the transfer income tax was not paid upon the transfer of the instant apartment.

Pursuant to Article 104(1) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 10408, Dec. 27, 2010; hereinafter the same), the Defendant issued the instant disposition imposing the transfer income tax calculated by applying the basic tax rate to the tax base calculated by applying the acquisition value to the Plaintiff, the transfer value of the instant apartment to 678 million won, and the acquisition value to 225 million won.

The Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition with the National Tax Service on December 29, 2016, but filed a petition for review with the National Tax Service on June 20, 2017, but did not accept the petition for review.

(Transfer C) 2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant disposition

A. The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case in this case is unlawful as the ground for the claim of this case and the revocation of the disposition in this case is unlawful.

B. In light of the premise that the apartment house of this case falls under Article 167-5 (1) 2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act and does not fall under "two houses for one household prescribed by Presidential Decree" under Article 104 (1) 6 of the former Income Tax Act, the disposition of this case by applying Article 104 (1) 1 of the former Income Tax Act was conducted based on the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes (the defendant applied the basic tax rate pursuant to Article 14 of the Addenda of the former Income Tax Act in calculating the transfer income tax of the apartment of this case). Thus, the plaintiff's assertion on the premise that the basic tax rate should be applied in accordance with Article 104 (1) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act shall not be accepted without