1. The Defendant’s imposition of a penalty surcharge of KRW 34,80,000 against the Plaintiff on July 25, 2017 is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 22, 1989, the Plaintiff and B reported marriage, and on February 19, 2016, reported divorce.

B. B completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on January 4, 1993 with respect to C Apartment 103 Dong 1801 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu on July 30, 1996

C. On February 20, 2008, the Plaintiff and B entered into a contract to donate the instant apartment to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant donation contract”). The Plaintiff, based on Article 3 of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate on the same day, obtained the Defendant’s approval seal in the said donation contract.

On March 7, 2008, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,520,000 (including local education tax of KRW 288,00) and registration tax of KRW 1,728,00 (including local education tax of KRW 288,00) to the Defendant.

E. On December 2, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant apartment due to the instant donation contract.

F. On July 25, 2017, the Defendant imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 34,800,000 on the Plaintiff on July 25, 2017, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not file an application for the registration of ownership transfer on the instant apartment within three years from the time when the Plaintiff entered into the instant donation contract, and violated Article 10 of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”), which was subject to imposition of a penalty surcharge of KRW 34,80,000 [The assessed value of the instant apartment (multi-family housing price in 2015) x 20% (= the imposition rate of penalty surcharge of KRW 5%

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The defendant's disposition of this case by the plaintiff is unlawful for the following reasons.

1. The Plaintiff only entered into the instant donation contract to prevent the instant apartment from being disposed of without permission during the marriage period, and subsequently, agreed to divorce with B around December 2015.