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

A. Reasons for the registration of ownership transfer, etc. of the instant land

1) The KimL owned an OO 00 forest 31,246 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) in a female city, and on November 10, 2006, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed on November 2, 2006 with respect to each of the instant 1/2 shares among the instant land under the name of the Plaintiff and KimE. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 19810, Nov. 2, 2006>

2) On September 20, 2007, the entire transfer registration was made in the name of the Plaintiff with respect to the above 1/2 portion of the land in the name of KimE.

3) On September 20, 2007, the FF Finance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “FF Finance”) submitted an application for a loan of KRW 000 to the Plaintiff with the instant land as collateral, and the FF Finance deposited KRW 000 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant loan”) in the Plaintiff’s bank account on the same day while performing the loan pursuant to the above loan application, and on the other hand, on the instant land as collateral for the instant loan, the ownership transfer claim registration was made on September 20, 207 on the instant land.

4) After that, on July 4, 2008, the ownership transfer registration was made in the name of KimGG on the instant land, and the provisional registration mentioned in paragraph 3 above was cancelled on the same day, and on July 3, 2008, the registration of the right to claim ownership transfer based on each reservation was completed on July 3, 2008 in the FG name.

5) On the other hand, on December 4, 2008, when the obligation of the instant loan was not repaid, the registration of ownership transfer based on the provisional registration was made on the FF Finance’s name with the transaction value of FF Finance as KRW 000.

B. Details of the instant disposition

1) On July 2010, the Defendant determined and notified the transfer value of the instant land to KimG as KRW 000, and KRW 000,000 for transfer income tax for the year 2008.

2) The Gwangju regional tax office conducted a tax investigation on the transfer income tax of the instant land between July 5, 2011 and July 29, 2011, and notified the Defendant that the Plaintiff transferred the instant land to FF financing practically.

(3) According to the above findings, the Defendant revoked the disposition imposing capital gains tax on KimG on October 4, 201 in accordance with the above Paragraph (1) and issued a correction and notification of KRW 000 of the transfer income tax for the instant land at KRW 000, and KRW 000 of the transfer income tax for the year 2008 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff’s objection to the instant disposition is against the Plaintiff.

1) The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection with the Commissioner of the Gwangju Regional Tax Office on December 30, 201, and the Director of the Gwangju Regional Tax Office dismissed the said objection on January 27, 2012.

2) The Plaintiff filed a request for examination with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on April 18, 2012, and the Commissioner of the National Tax Service dismissed the said request on July 20, 2012.

[Based on Recognition] Specifications A 1 through 5, Eul 1, 5, 7, and 8 (including each number)

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

On November 10, 2006, the deceased Kim H (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased on April 5, 2010, hereinafter) purchased the instant land from KimL, the deceased, and the plaintiff, and le II, the plaintiff, and the plaintiff, and le II, the deceased acquired the above shares in the name of KimE, and the deceased acquired the shares in the name of le II, the transfer of all shares was made in the name of the plaintiff, and the plaintiff was merely the title trustee of the instant land, and the title truster transferred the instant land to FF finance as payment in substitutes, and the income therefrom was attributed to the truster. Accordingly, the instant disposition taken by the defendant against the plaintiff who is the title trustee is unlawful as a disposition of imposition against the non-resident.

B. Facts of recognition

1) The Plaintiff’s husband, Kim J, the husband of the Plaintiff, remitted the sum of KRW 000 on November 2, 2006, and KRW 000 on November 9, 2006, to the seller’s account, Kim J paid KRW 000 in the purchase price of the instant trade.

2) Details of the use of the instant loan

A) Details on the use of KRW 000, which was withdrawn by cash or cashier’s checks on September 20, 2007

B) Details on the use of KRW 000, which was withdrawn by cash or cashier’s checks on September 27, 2007

C) On September 27, 2007, the details of the Plaintiff’s use of KRW 000 remitted to the Plaintiff’s Agricultural Cooperative Account.

3) Payment of interest on the instant loans

The Plaintiff paid FFF Finance KRW 00 on October 22, 2007 and November 20, 2007 each interest rate on the instant loan.

4) Investigation of Gwangju Regional Tax Office

A) At the time when the Gwangju Regional Tax Office conducted a tax investigation on the transfer income tax of the instant land, and on July 25, 201, the Plaintiff recommended the Plaintiff to purchase the instant land by deeming that the deceased was fine if he created the instant land as a park cemetery, and the Plaintiff acquired the instant land along with KimE. The Plaintiff stated that part of the instant loan was paid to the Deceased as compensation for the instant loan.

B) As a result of the tax investigation, the Director of the Gwangju Regional Tax Office deemed that the Plaintiff actually transferred the instant land to the FF Finance, and that the disposition of imposition of the transfer income tax for the 2008 KimG was revoked, and that the transfer income tax for the Plaintiff in 2008 was corrected and decided as KRW 000.

5) The legality review prior to taxation

After being notified of the results of the tax investigation, the Plaintiff filed a request for pre-assessment review on August 24, 201, and the Plaintiff asserted that it had made a substantial transaction with KimGG and the instant land, but withdrawn the request for pre-assessment review on September 7, 201.

[Based on Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap 3 through 5, Eul 8 through 12 (including each number), Eul 13-20 to 24, Eul 4, and 5, each entry into the Bank of Korea of this Court, the Bank of Korea's Credit Branch and other financial transaction information submission orders, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole.

C. Determination

1) In the case of title trust of real estate to a third party, if the title truster transfers the real estate and income from such transfer belongs to the title truster, and under the principle of substantial taxation under Article 14(1) of the former Framework Act on National Taxes, the person liable to pay the relevant transfer income tax does not belong to the title truster under the name of the title truster, who is the subject of the transfer (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Nu6387, Oct. 10, 197). Furthermore, the fact that the title truster, who is the subject of the transfer, has the burden of proving that there is only the title truster, and there is a person who has actually received the income (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 84Nu505, Dec. 11, 1984). Furthermore, since a person registered as the owner of the real estate is presumed to have acquired the ownership through legitimate procedures and causes, the fact that the registration is based on the title trust has the burden of proof for the claimant

24. See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da90883, supra)

2) The following circumstances revealed in addition to the overall purport of the arguments as to the instant case, namely, the Plaintiff appears to have paid KRW 000 to KimL at the time of the instant purchase, and the FF Finance deposited the instant loan (00 won) with the Plaintiff’s account on September 20, 207, and the amount transferred to the deceased’s account out of the instant loan is 000 won, and the Plaintiff was under the tax investigation conducted by the Gwangju Regional Tax Office on July 25, 2011, and the Plaintiff stated that the Plaintiff acquired the instant land at the request of the Deceased, and the Plaintiff was merely hard to find that the Plaintiff acquired the instant land at the request of the title trustee 1, and the Plaintiff did not have any other objective evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiff transferred the instant land, and that the Plaintiff did not have any other evidence to prove that the Plaintiff had any other evidence to prove that the Plaintiff had no record of tax investigation on the instant land, including 1, 2008, and 1, 2, 3GGGG.

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.