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 July 21, 2009, the Plaintiff and his son, together with the householder B, resided in the 153.1 square meters of the second-story housing located in Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant housing”), and all of the household members sold the instant housing as follows, and moved into Daejeon Dong-gu apartment E.

B. The Plaintiff newly built the instant house on May 14, 1994, and filed a return on capital gains on January 10, 2017 on February 13, 2017 on the ground that the Plaintiff is exempt from one house for one household.

C. Accordingly, on July 4, 2017, the Defendant issued a disposition imposing capital gains tax of KRW 46,036,620 on the ground that: (a) at the time of the transfer of the instant house, the Plaintiff’s son B, while living together with the Plaintiff, constitutes the same household; and (b) he/she does not constitute one house for one household; and (c) thereby, the Defendant rendered the instant disposition.

D) The Plaintiff appealed against the instant disposition, and filed an objection and a request for trial, but all of the above claims were dismissed. [The Plaintiff’s entries in Gap’s 1-1, 1-2, and 9, Eul’s 1 through 4-4, and Eul’s 7-1 through 7-5, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. While the Plaintiff’s argument is the same as the Plaintiff’s household based on the Plaintiff’s resident registration and B, the Plaintiff and its children were living together for the Plaintiff’s nursing and the amount of salary, and have separate economic activities and their livelihood, the instant disposition on a different premise is unlawful, even if the Plaintiff owned the Plaintiff’s housing, even if the Plaintiff’s children owned the housing, it constitutes one house for one household.

B. The main sentence of Article 154(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27829, Feb. 3, 2017) is “one house for one household prescribed by Presidential Decree” in Article 89(1)3 (a) of the Act means a resident and his/her.