1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 16, 2009, the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter “the instant apartment”) was completed in the name of the Plaintiff on November 16, 2009 with respect to “B 104 Dong 203, Chang-gu, Changwon-si” (hereinafter “the instant apartment”). On May 30, 2012, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of the Plaintiff’s adjustment on May 8, 2012 under the name of the Plaintiff.

B. On December 4, 2014, the head of the Suwon Tax Office notified the Defendant of the details of real estate title trust with the purport that “the Plaintiff trusted the instant apartment from November 16, 2009 to May 30, 2012,” and the Defendant imposed a penalty surcharge of KRW 37,600,000 on the Plaintiff on February 23, 2015, following the procedure for prior notice of disposal and submission of opinions, pursuant to Articles 3(1) and 5 of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”), and Article 3-2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree of the Real Estate Real Name Act”).

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

The Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal seeking revocation of the instant disposition or reduction of a penalty surcharge with the Gyeonggi-do Administrative Appeals Commission, but the said administrative appeal was dismissed on June 24, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence 1 to 5 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion 1 had no choice but to register the apartment in the name of C, which was the head of the apartment in this case, in order to continue to reside in the official residence at the time of the purchase of the apartment in this case. The plaintiff did not know at all that the act of title trust with C is against the Real Estate Real Name Act, and if it was done by the licensed real estate agent at the time, completing the registration of title transfer by the licensed real estate agent in this case is in violation of the Real Estate Real Name Act.