1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion and B (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”) on June 25, 2013: (a) at the auction procedure, the Plaintiff and B (hereinafter “the Plaintiff”) were simultaneously awarded a successful bid for KRW 6,019,397,00 for the land and the factory buildings on the land (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and machinery and appliances at the time of regular Eup, D, E, and the auction procedure.

(However, on July 3, 2015, the Plaintiff and B agreed that the Plaintiff acquired the entire ownership of the instant real estate and machinery. Afterwards, the Plaintiff sold the instant real estate in KRW 3,950,000,000 to the Defendant. At the time, the Plaintiff, at the Defendant’s request, made a sales contract (so-called a business contract) stating the purchase price of KRW 5,200,000 in order for the Defendant to obtain a large amount of loan from the bank.

Based on the above business contract, the Plaintiff reported the transfer value of the instant real estate to the head of Jung-Eup Tax Office, and the head of Jung-Eup Tax Office imposed the transfer income tax on the Plaintiff considering the difference between the transfer value of the said report and the successful bid price of the instant real estate borne by the Plaintiff (excluding the parts related to machinery and appliances among the total successful bid price) as transfer gains. Accordingly, the Plaintiff suffered legal disadvantage that excessive transfer income tax should be paid.

Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks to confirm that the actual purchase price of the instant real estate does not exceed KRW 3,950,000,000, under the premise of seeking revocation of the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax by the head of Jung-Eup Tax Office.

2. The defendant's judgment on the main defense of this case argues that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because there is no benefit of confirmation.

In a lawsuit for confirmation, there is a dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation, and thereby, it is the most effective and appropriate means to determine the plaintiff's legal status as a confirmation judgment to eliminate the anxiety and risk when the plaintiff's legal status is unstable and dangerous.