1. To dismiss a request for revocation of the disposition of imposition of KRW 850,040 for additional tax on negligent tax returns among the instant lawsuits.

2. The plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. Since the Plaintiff was appointed as the Gyeonggi-gu Local Agriculture and Forestry Grade, the Plaintiff was in office in Yangyang-gun, G, etc. on May 11, 197, and was promoted to a local agricultural official on November 20, 199 and served as the head of Yangyang-gun, E, etc., and was promoted to the F General on December 23, 2009 and voluntarily retired.

B. The Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer from G, which was referred to in August 16, 2006, on the ground of the Gyeonggi-do H 1,087 square meters (hereinafter “the instant farmland”)’s donation on August 3, 2006 (hereinafter “the instant donation”). On November 6, 2006, the Plaintiff reported the gift tax to the Defendant on the ground that it falls under the farming children as stipulated in Article 15 of the Addenda of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (Act No. 5584, Dec. 28, 1998), Article 58(1) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by the Restriction of Special Taxation Act by Act No. 5584, Dec. 28, 1998; hereinafter “Act”), and did not pay the gift tax concerned on the ground that it falls under the farming children.

C. On June 1, 2013, the Defendant imposed KRW 8,146,358 on the Plaintiff on the ground that “the Plaintiff cannot be deemed as having performed his/her duty as a public official of the Yangyang-gun, and thus, cannot be deemed as having performed his/her duty,” which includes additional tax on negligent tax returns, KRW 850,040,040, additional tax on negligent tax, KRW 3,046,118.

(hereinafter referred to as “previous Disposition”). D.

On July 23, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a request for review of the previous disposition with the Board of Audit and Inspection through the Defendant, but was dismissed on March 7, 2014.

E. Meanwhile, on October 28, 2014, the Defendant revoked ex officio the part of the additional tax on negligent tax returns during the previous disposition, which was pending in the instant lawsuit.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”). Grounds for recognition of the previous disposition that remains cancelled as above are written in the absence of dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-2, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-3, Gap evidence 3-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 4, Gap evidence 5-1, 2, Gap evidence 5-2, Eul evidence 24, Eul evidence 1-2, and Eul evidence 1-2.