구상금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Facts of recognition
The plaintiff and the defendant married on September 12, 1984, but divorced on December 8, 2002, and have maintained a de facto marital relationship later.
On December 27, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming consolation money and division of property (201ddan17527) with the Defendant in this court. The Defendant also filed a counterclaim against the Plaintiff to the claim for consolation money and division of property (2013ddan10124) and rendered a judgment on October 22, 2013 that “B shall pay KRW 282,00,000 to A as division of property,” which became final and conclusive around that time.
The Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to transfer the ownership of land C and ground factories, D, E, and F (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) to the Plaintiff in light of broad life time by concluding a division of property (hereinafter “instant agreement”) separate from the above final judgment.
On December 17, 2013, the Plaintiff prepared and issued a letter of performance to the Defendant that he/she will be liable for capital gains tax on the transfer of ownership of each of the instant real estate.
Since then, the Plaintiff received ownership of each real estate of this case from the Defendant, and paid the total amount of KRW 119,531,330,000 to the acquisition tax, local education tax, and special rural development tax imposed thereby, on December 24, 2013.
【Ground of recognition” without any dispute, Gap 1, 2, 7, 18 evidence, Eul 1, Eul 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff asserted that the plaintiff paid 119,531,30 won of the acquisition tax, etc. for each real estate of this case by priority, and that the plaintiff should return 47,812,532 won of the acquisition tax, etc. by the plaintiff and the defendant, which became final and conclusive in the relevant judgment, inasmuch as the share of acquisition tax, etc. is also subject to division of property.
However, at the time of entering into the instant agreement, the Plaintiff and the Defendant were mistakenly aware that acquisition tax, etc. of each of the instant real estate would have been reduced or exempted.