The maintenance foundation of the Korean President of the Korean Barun General Assembly (Law Firm Barun, Attorney Kim Jong-hoon, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

The head of Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Law Firm Dongin, Attorneys Kim Yong-jin, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

December 5, 2007

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s imposition disposition of KRW 58,067,340 for the Plaintiff on December 10, 2006, exceeding KRW 40,385,260, among the imposition disposition of KRW 40,385,260 for the year 2005, and the imposition disposition of KRW 108,779,610 for the local education tax, each of which exceeds KRW 7,470,370.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 26, 1980, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the foundation established for the purpose of the management of property owned by the Foundation, the missionary work of the Docian, student meat and volunteer service business, etc. on December 20, 2004, between the Docian, the foundation, a foundation, on December 20, 2004, to purchase the price of KRW 18,215 square meters of land, KRW 600 square meters of land, KRW 684 square meters of land, KRW 601-2 land, and each of the above above above above above above ground buildings (a total of KRW 20,373 square meters of land, total of building area, KRW 6,906.86 square meters of land and buildings; hereinafter referred to as the “instant real estate”). On February 28, 2005, the Plaintiff paid the remainder of the purchase and sale money.

B. On May 25, 2005, the Plaintiff acquired the instant real estate on May 24, 2005, and reported and paid acquisition tax of KRW 175,34,600 and special rural development tax to the Defendant on June 24, 2005. In addition, the Plaintiff reported and paid acquisition tax of KRW 175,34,600 and special rural development tax of KRW 17,534,60 to the Defendant on the ground that it is directly used for the purpose of business by a religious organization under Articles 107 and 127(1) of the Local Tax Act. In addition, the Plaintiff received an application for non-taxation and registration tax from the Defendant on the ground that the “Yauri Saium” (land size 2,211.67 square meters, building area 749.8 square meters) and the “Yaman General Center” (land size 2,910,62 square meters, building area 986 square meters) and registration tax.

C. The Defendant’s tax investigation into the instant real estate: ① on December 10, 206, the Plaintiff’s tax base of KRW 30,50 for the instant real estate + (i) on the ground that the Plaintiff reported acquisition of the instant real estate on February 28, 2005, and (ii) on June 24, 2005, additional tax of KRW 39,593,290 and additional tax of KRW 1,753,520 shall be imposed. (ii) on the instant real estate acquisition tax for KRW 1,736,50 and the instant real estate ownership transfer registration tax for KRW 70,67,00 for the instant real estate to be imposed on KRW 1,736,57,00,00 for the instant real estate and KRW 1,736,57,000,000 for the instant real estate to be imposed on KRW 1,516,736,736,746,78,7636,7.

D. On February 1, 2007, the Plaintiff filed a request for review of the instant disposition with the Minister of Government Administration and Home Affairs, but the Minister of Government Administration and Home Affairs dismissed the said request for review on April 30 of the same year.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 4-2, Eul evidence 8-1, Eul evidence 8-2 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case is unlawful for the following reasons.

The Plaintiff established and registered a branch office with an address of 190-10 in Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government in order to establish a new general assembly center and operate a rental business for the building. However, on November 10, 2004, the above branch office was established as a business registration and a branch office only on corporate register without any physical and human equipment and without conducting business activities or business activities. However, the above branch office was established as an independent business registration for the establishment of a new development corporation (hereinafter referred to as “new development corporation”) or a branch office without any experience in operating the Plaintiff’s principal office to 76, Gangnam-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City, which is an accommodation that is not directly used for a religious business, without operating the hotel business, and thus, the facility management service was established within the new development corporation or new branch office (hereinafter referred to as “new development corporation”). However, since the former branch office did not constitute an independent business registration for the establishment of the main office and supervision of the Plaintiff’s business without any real operation of the main office, the establishment of the main office or new branch office is entrusted with the establishment of the Plaintiff.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Table related statutes.

(c) Fact of recognition;

(1) On November 26, 1980, the Plaintiff completed the registration of incorporation of a corporation with the head office of Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as the head office of 136-56, Jongno-gu.

(2) On May 1, 2003, the Plaintiff: (a) donated 190-10 to 3,736 square meters from the Seodaemun-gu Foundation for the Maintenance of the Diplomatic Association; (b) formulated a plan to remove the building on the ground to construct the Plaintiff’s general assembly hall; and (c) registered on May 26, 2003, the name of the corporation (the name of the organization) as the Korea Association for the Maintenance of the Diplomatic Association; (b) the location of the place of business was 190-10; (c) the location of the place of business was 136-5010, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul; and (d) the type of business was registered as a real estate rental business under the name of the Plaintiff’s branch office on March 9, 2004.

(3) However, on November 19, 2004, the Plaintiff’s plan to construct a general assembly center at a place where the building was removed was designated as cultural heritage by the Seodaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government as the building for the missionary work education center of the Korea Gagwon Association on the ground of 190-10 and notified the notification of the registration of cultural heritage (registration No. 142).

(4) Accordingly, the Plaintiff acquired the instant real estate as an alternative to the construction of the General Assembly Center, and transferred the principal office on March 21, 2005 to Suwon-dong, Chungcheongnam-gu, Seoul, and registered it in the corporate register on July 20 of the same year. In addition, on August 29, 2005, the Plaintiff changed the name of the juristic person (organization name) to the (Seoul), the name of the juristic person on the above business registration, transferred the place of business to Suwon-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and changed the registration of the business operator who added the type of hotel, the traditional type of business, the traditional type of business, the traditional type of business, and the foreign exchange business. On January 20, 2006, the Plaintiff registered the relocation of the branch office in the corporate register of the Plaintiff to the above place.

(5) On December 30, 2004, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the management of facilities relating to a building, with the following content between the Newjin Development Doz.:

(A) The Plaintiff shall report and obtain approval on the maintenance and management of the monthly facilities, etc. for the new Jin Development (Article 5) and perform all duties in accordance with the plan (Article 5).

(B) prepare a daily work log, etc. for the new Jinjin Development and report it to the Plaintiff’s person responsible for management (Article 6).

(C) All kinds of expendable goods and materials necessary for the maintenance and repair work of the facilities in the New Jin Development area are supplied by the Plaintiff (Article VII).

(D) When the plaintiff is notified that it is inappropriate as a result of the inspection of the employee's work status, work must be conducted under the direction and supervision of the newly developed UN plaintiff (Article 8).

(E) An employee of the New Jin-Tech must not leave the work site during working hours, be absent from work, be subject to approval from the person responsible for the site of the New Jin-Tech at the time of his early retirement, and be notified to the person responsible for the management of the new Jin-Tech (Article 11).

(6) In addition, on July 4, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement on the entrusted operation of accommodation facilities between Edysia and Edysia with the following content:

(A) The Plaintiff, as a representative of the contractual facilities, shall obtain authorization and permission related to contractual facilities, such as a building permit, usage inspection, business permit, etc. in its own name, and shall complete the construction and interior decoration of contractual facilities, and shall be equipped with or keep the equipment necessary for the operation of the contractual facilities, furniture, office fixtures, pumps, green lines, computer devices, office fixtures, etc. (Article 5).

(B) The Plaintiff shall supervise the business of E&C, and may allow a person designated by the Plaintiff to inspect all books related to the contract facilities, conduct an accounting audit (two times a year), and inspect facilities. If it is found that E&C business operations related to E&C violate relevant laws and regulations or are unfair, he/she may request correction thereof, and E&C must comply with E&C unless there is good cause (Article 6).

(C) AHC must establish and maintain an appropriate accounting system in accordance with the corporate accounting standards. All accounting books and records shall be kept in the contract facility and the name of the plaintiff. The revenue accrued on the day from the operation of the entrusted facility shall be deposited in the passbook designated by the plaintiff by the next morning, and the details of monthly revenue and expenses and the operational performance shall be reported to the plaintiff by the 10th day of the following month. The plaintiff may designate the plaintiff's staff as a person in charge of accounting if necessary (Article 9).

(D) The Plaintiff’s personnel expenses (including retirement allowances and welfare expenses) for EP’s employees related to the instant contract shall be paid on the 25th day of each month, and EP shall be disbursed within the total amount of the agreed personnel expenses, but where any event beyond the agreed personnel expenses occurs, EP shall be executed by an agreement between the Plaintiff and EPC (Article 11).

(E) The funds necessary for the operation of contract facilities shall be transferred to the head of the Tong designated by the Plaintiff at the request of EPC and used by EP (Article 12).

(F) In return for the entrusted operation, the Plaintiff paid the annual operating profit of EP as a basic fee when the annual operating profit exceeds KRW 750 million, and the annual operating profit exceeds KRW 750 million and basic fees, 40% of the excess amount until the fifth year, and 30% of the excess amount after the sixth year, and the payment period shall be the end of February of the following year, and if the annual operating profit does not reach the material cost and personnel expenses, all responsibilities shall be imposed (Article 13).

(7) On the Plaintiff’s website, the term “permanent training center” appears to have been operated for 220,000 won per guest room and 110,000 won per guest room and 24 hours business center for accommodation (providing such information as Internet, facsimile, printer, and reproduction).

(8) The corporate tax base and tax amount return of the plaintiff (business registration number 2 omitted), the corporate tax base and tax amount return of the plaintiff (registration number 2 omitted), the corporate tax of the plaintiff (registration number 2 omitted), the corporate tax of the plaintiff (registration number 2 omitted), the corporate tax of the plaintiff (registration number 2 omitted), the corporate tax of the plaintiff (registration number 2 omitted), the corporate tax of the plaintiff (registration number 1 omitted), and the corporate tax base and the tax amount return of the corporate tax of the plane Paria (registration number 1 omitted), the corporate foundation, the corporate tax of the defendant (registration number 1 omitted), the business type: the hotel outside of the hotel) were separately reported.

[Ground of recognition] The evidence Nos. 1 to 14, evidence Nos. 1 to 3-3, evidence Nos. 6-1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

(1) In real estate registration pursuant to the establishment of a branch or a sub-branch which is a requirement for heavy registration tax under Article 138 (1) 3 of the former Local Tax Act, the term "branch or sub-branch" means a business place registered under the provisions of the Corporate Tax Act, the Value-Added Tax Act, or the Income Tax Act, where a business or affairs of the pertinent juristic person is conducted continuously with human and physical facilities, regardless of its title, regardless of its title. The term "personal facilities" refers to a business place where a person is stationed under the direction and supervision of the pertinent juristic person, and the form of employment does not necessarily require that the person take the form of employment directly belonging to the pertinent juristic person (see Supreme Court Decision 98Du2737,

(2) The above facts are as follows: ① the Plaintiff changed the name and location of a hotel business under the above business registration; ② the Plaintiff registered the transfer of a branch office under the corporate register of the instant real estate; the head office of the Plaintiff separately registered the business, and then separately processed the Plaintiff’s head office and accounts; ② the Plaintiff’s provision of physical facilities, such as equipment, furniture, computer equipment, office equipment, and equipment for the management of new equipment and equipment, etc. to the Plaintiff, which are necessary for the management of new equipment and facilities under the direction and supervision of the Plaintiff’s new equipment and facilities management services, and the Plaintiff’s provision of equipment and equipment for the management of new equipment and facilities under the direction and supervision of the Plaintiff’s new equipment and facilities for the management of new equipment and facilities for the purpose of the management of new equipment and facilities for the purpose of the Plaintiff’s management of new equipment and facilities for the purpose of the management of new equipment and facilities each month.

(3) Therefore, the instant disposition imposing the registration tax, etc. on the instant real estate by deeming that the registration of ownership transfer in the Plaintiff’s name constitutes the real estate registration following the establishment of a branch in a large city as the Plaintiff’s branch office.

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.

[Attachment Form 5]

Judges Jeon Sung-soo (Presiding Judge)