1. The Plaintiff, Defendant C, Defendant D, Defendant D, KRW 3,781,220, Defendant E, and KRW 23,925,042, and each of the above.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an urban environment improvement association which has obtained authorization to establish an association from the head of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “head of Yongsan-gu”) on June 13, 2007 for the purpose of implementing an urban environment improvement project by designating the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Financial Group as a project implementation district (hereinafter “instant project”). The Defendants are the Plaintiff’s members.

B. The Plaintiff newly constructed a G building in the said project implementation district (hereinafter “instant building”) and sold it to its members and the general public.

C. On May 20, 2015, the Plaintiff held an ordinary general meeting to dissolve the association and passed a resolution on the dissolution and liquidation of the association to delegate the business of the association, such as the collection and payment of liquidation money, to the Liquidation Committee after dissolution.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 6, purport of whole pleadings

2. The attachment to the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes shall be as follows;

3. Claim against Defendant C, D, and E

A. 1) The Plaintiff: (a) Defendant C, among the H of the instant building, 3/11 shares; (b) Defendant D, 2/11 shares among the H; and (c) Defendant E, respectively, was sold in lots; and (d) Defendant E, the Plaintiff obtained authorization of the completion of the instant building from the head of Yongsan-gu on July 15, 2013; and (b) on September 9, 2013, the Plaintiff was subject to a disposition of imposition of KRW 4,793,734,690 on November 14, 2016.

Accordingly, on November 15, 2016, the Plaintiff’s Liquidation Committee passed a resolution to lower the project cost rate from 138.703% to 135.171%, and on the same day, requested Defendant C, D, and E to pay the additional liquidation money incurred due to the change in the project cost rate until November 30, 2016.

3 The Plaintiff paid the above acquisition tax on November 30, 2016.

On August 3, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on the imposition of acquisition tax, and the Tax Tribunal rendered a decision to reduce the above acquisition tax to KRW 1,592,159,460.

Accordingly, the plaintiff.