2. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the defendant.

A. As to the 98/30 (hereinafter referred to as "the co-ownership of this case") out of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1. 30 (hereinafter referred to as "the instant co-ownership") as stated in the separate sheet No. 1. 1, 2003, on December 10, 2003, the registration of transfer of shares was completed as the receipt of No. 132866 on December 10, 2003, and the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff's wife high ○○ (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff, etc.") completed the registration of transfer of shares on February 12, 2009 as to the shares of 1/2 (49/30) of each co-ownership of this case as of February 2, 2009.

B. After investigating the transfer income tax on ○○, the head of a tax office determined the transfer value that the Plaintiff et al. acquired the instant co-ownership of KRW 2 billion from ○○○, and imposed the transfer income tax on ○○○, and notified the Defendant of the taxation data that the Plaintiff acquired the interest income equivalent to the aggregate of KRW 000 as follows:

Reversion of year 2007 (won) Reversion of year 2009

Non-business proceeds82,40,00765,000,000

Financial interest 2,242,007,403,000

Total 84,642,0072,403,000

Global income tax 33,923,00347,842,000

C. From January 24, 2013 to February 19, 2013, the Defendant: (a) determined that the Plaintiff omitted interest income equivalent to the taxation data received from ○○ from ○○ upon filing a global income tax return; and (b) on April 8, 2013, the Defendant corrected and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 000,000, global income tax for the year 2007, and KRW 000,000, global income tax for the year 2009.

D. The Plaintiff filed an objection against the disposition of rectification of global income tax of KRW 0000 for the year 2009 on the purport that the Plaintiff’s non-business profit accrued in 2009 was illegal, not the amount actually paid. However, on October 24, 2013, the Plaintiff received a decision of dismissal from the Tax Tribunal (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 13, 29 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Details of the instant disposition

A. The plaintiff's assertion

On March 9, 2005, the Plaintiff purchased 1/2 (49/30) of the instant co-ownership shares from ○○○○, as interest income from KRW 400,000,00. On February 2, 2009, a half (49/30) of the instant co-ownership was additionally purchased at KRW 1,400,000,000, and the actual purchase price was KRW 1,400,000,000,000. The Defendant determined that KRW 00,000,000, which was 1/2 of the instant co-ownership shares stated in the contract as to KRW 1/2 of the instant co-ownership shares, deducted from KRW 49/30,000, which was 00,000 as interest income from KRW 200,000, and thus, the instant disposition was unlawful.

B. Relevant statutes

Attached Form. The entry in the relevant statutes is as follows.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) The first sales contract

A) The ○○○ purchased shares in the instant case from the privateB, a private village, in the amount of KRW 000, and completed the registration of transfer of shares on December 10, 2003.

B) The Plaintiff purchased the rest portion of the instant land, which is owned by his private village from ○○○, and newly constructed the de facto town on the ground, and accepted the proposal to conduct welfare business on the same ground. On March 9, 2005, the Plaintiff purchased 202/30 of the instant land in the name of ○○○, and the purchase price shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the purchase price shall be borne by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff and ○○○ shall transfer the ownership to 1/2 each, and the Plaintiff and ○○○ shall complete the registration of creation of a mortgage before completing the registration of ownership transfer, and was notarized (No. 2005 No. 005).

C) On March 9, 2005, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract to purchase 1/2 (49/300 of the instant co-ownership shares from ○○○○, to purchase 400,000,000 won (hereinafter “the first sales contract”), and paid 40,000 won for the down payment of 10,000 won for intermediate payment and intermediate payment of 000 won to ○○, and 000 won for the remainder on April 6, 2005, respectively. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff cannot register the ownership transfer under the name of the Plaintiff as the land transaction permission zone. The Plaintiff completed the registration of the establishment of the instant co-ownership as the receipt of 25458, Mar. 14, 2005 for the sake of securing the right.

2) To borrow money from private sector ○.

A) Upon the Plaintiff’s request, the ○○○○ deposited KRW 000,000,000, which was the sum of the interest accrued from January 1, 2007 to August 30, 2007, with the Plaintiff’s account as follows.

Royal principal (original) interest rate higher than that of a fake

1. Females of 2% of the plaintiff on June 9, 2006, 200,000

on August 30, 2006 DM 2% on August 30, 2006

1.5% of the Plaintiff on September 27, 2006 1.5% of ○○○○ 200,000,000

Total 560,000,000

B) As ○○ was unable to repay the principal of the above loan, the registration of the establishment of the instant co-ownership under the name of ○○○ (the maximum bond amount of KRW 360,000,000) (the maximum bond amount of KRW 312,00,000) and ECC (the maximum bond amount of KRW 312,00,000) was completed with respect to the instant co-ownership as of October 4, 2007, which was received on October 4, 2007.

C) On July 3, 2008, thisCC filed an application for voluntary auction upon the registration of the establishment of the foregoing neighboring mortgage, and received a decision to commence the auction (Seoul District Court Decision 2008 Dolcheon District Court Decision 12001).

(iii) the secondary sales contract and the transfer of ownership;

A) On January 30, 2009, when the designation of the land transaction permission zone was cancelled, the Plaintiff, etc. around February 2009, purchased 1/2 (49/300) of the co-ownership shares of this case already purchased by the Plaintiff pursuant to the first sale contract from ○○○, and paid 250,000,000,000 won, deducting the principal of the loans made by ○○ and thisCC and interest accrued until then, separately (hereinafter referred to as “second sale contract”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff, etc. completed the registration of ownership transfer with ○○, for co-ownership of 250,00,000,000 won (hereinafter referred to as “second sale contract”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff, etc. completed the registration of ownership transfer with 0,000,000 won, 30,0000,000 won for co-ownership share of 30,009,209,3009,2009.

B) A certified judicial scrivener, when completing the registration of transfer of ownership in accordance with a sales contract, can obtain a certificate of completion of report on transaction value, etc. Therefore, in consultation with the Plaintiff, the sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) dated February 2, 2009, which was necessary for the registration of transfer of ownership taking into account the standard market price at the time, entered the sale price of KRW 2 billion into account as KRW 390,000,000, KRW 350,000,000, KRW 985,000,000, KRW 25,000,000, and cemetery equipment as KRW 25,00,000.

Principal of the defect amount in his name and injury, interest rate increase

Lee○○390,000,00030,000,000,0090,000,000,000

Lee○○350,000,00260,000,000,0090,000,000

Total 1,725,00,000,00960,000,00765,000,000

C) The Defendant estimated the principal and interest thereon on the basis of the defective amount entered in the registration statement in the instant sales contract. The Defendant determined that the Plaintiff was a profit that the Plaintiff received in relation to KRW 400 million, deducting the remainder of KRW 000,000 from the defective amount entered in the public record, from the purchase price of KRW 000 under the first sales contract.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 9 through 28, Evidence Nos. 3, Witness ○○’s testimony, and the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

The Defendant calculated the above amount as a non-business profit, and imposed global income tax for the year 2009 on the ground that the Plaintiff acquired interest of KRW 400 million from ○○ pursuant to a loan for consumption agreement, etc. without making a loan for money lending business.

However, as seen in the above facts, the Plaintiff agreed to purchase 1/2 (49/30) of the co-ownership shares in this case from ○○○, in fact, and paid the purchase price. After the completion of the registration of ownership transfer, the Plaintiff entered into a single contract without dividing the ownership transfer under the first contract and the ownership transfer registration under the second contract into one contract for convenience, and entered only the purchase price of KRW 2 billion in the contract in order to report the transaction price to the government office. From ○○○, one half (49/30) of the co-ownership shares in this case had already been purchased from ○○○, and the payment was made in full, and there was no money specially received from ○○○○ due to delay in the registration of ownership transfer. However, even after the completion of the registration of ownership transfer, the Plaintiff did not receive additional money from ○○ at the time of the second sales contract. In other words, the Plaintiff cannot be said to have completed the registration of ownership transfer only after the completion of the registration of ownership transfer.

In addition, the defect amount entered in the Plaintiff’s public record on the instant sales contract is 985,00,000 ( = 2,000,0000,000- - 390,000,000- - 350,000-250,000-250,000- - 250,000,0000) and is merely 2,000,000 won, which is the purchase price under the instant sales contract, deducted the principal and interest of loans to ○○○○ and CC from the loan principal and interest of 000,000 won. Accordingly, it is not based on the profits actually acquired by the Plaintiff.

The total purchase price between the Plaintiff and public ○○ in relation to the instant co-ownership shares is KRW 1.4 billion in total, including the first purchase price of KRW 400 million and the second purchase price of KRW 1.1 billion in total, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 400 million in relation to the first sale contract to public ○○, but did not receive any compensation for delay or interest, etc. due to delay in ownership transfer from public ○○. Therefore, the instant disposition taken on the premise that the Plaintiff acquired 000 won in interest to KRW 400,000 in total until the time of the actual transfer registration of ownership, is unlawful, and the global income tax for 2009 shall be calculated again after deducting the above interest amount of KRW 00 from the global income. Since the materials submitted by the parties alone cannot be calculated on the sole basis of the materials submitted by the parties, the instant disposition in this case

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.