1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. All costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The conclusion of the sales contract and the payment of the sales price 1) K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”).

(2) On June 4, 2007, the Plaintiff purchased 7 lots of land, including 225 square meters, from N on June 4, 2007, in total, KRW 10,407,00,000,000, and paid the full amount of the purchase price on the same day. The amount of the above L field 225 square meters is 186 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “one parcel of land”).

(2) On June 4, 2007, K purchased 1,676,80,000 square meters from O for 1,066,80,000 square meters in Seo-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Incheon, and paid the full amount of the purchase price on June 5, 2007.

Since then, the above land was divided into M orchard 874 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “second land”) and X orchard 802 square meters.

On the other hand, the O died on August 14, 2010, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on September 5, 2016 by its inheritors.

3) As can be seen, K paid the full amount of the purchase price, but it was farmland, which was designated as a land transaction permission area, and thus the registration of ownership transfer was not complete.B. As to various real estate including the first and second lands, the Daejeon District Court Decision 50832, Jun. 4, 2008, which received the maximum debt amount of KRW 240,50,000,000, and the debtor K and the Defendants of K and the Defendant I-mortgage were not listed in the real estate registration register, but in light of the fact that they were the creditors of the voluntary auction application, it appears that K company acquired the claim of Z-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-mortgage-backed company was recorded as above, because the process is not clear and irrelevant to the issues of this case.

C. The Plaintiff’s designation of land transaction permission area on the land Nos. 1 and 2 was cancelled on January 30, 2009.

2 The Plaintiff: (a) on July 8, 2009, pursuant to Article 7(2) of the Local Tax Act, K regarded land Nos. 1 and 2 as “ de facto acquisition;” and (b) imposed acquisition tax on September 8, 2009.