1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 30, 2007, the Plaintiff transferred the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Multi-household Housing (9 households; hereinafter “instant housing”) to KRW 1,210,000,000, and around October 1, 2007, the Plaintiff deemed the instant housing as one house for one household which is exempt from some households, and reported and paid the transfer income tax of KRW 800,000,000, and the acquisition value of the instant housing was KRW 413,463,00.

B. On February 1, 2012, on the ground that the transfer value of the non-taxable portions of the instant housing was calculated excessively, the head of the regional tax office issued a revised and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 59,760,970 (including additional taxes), and KRW 10,554,720 (including additional taxes) of the transfer income tax for the year 207, and KRW 5,976,090 (including additional taxes; hereinafter “the instant local income tax”). The Defendant imposed and notified the local income tax (including the amount of the transfer income tax) and KRW 5,976,090.

[3] Article 93(2) and (5) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 11137, Dec. 31, 201) provides a notice of tax payment of local income tax of this case to the Plaintiff’s domicile along with the notice of capital gains tax, etc.

On November 16, 2012, the Defendant sent a written notice of default of local income tax of this case to the Plaintiff.

On June 28, 2013, the Defendant seized the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D apartment 403 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) owned by the Plaintiff on the grounds of delinquency in payment of KRW 7,231,020 in total of the Plaintiff’s local income tax and additional charges.

(On the other hand, the defendant, on November 15, 2016, participated in the auction procedure for the real estate related to the apartment of this case as the creditor and received the distribution).

On July 1, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the director of the regional tax office seeking revocation of the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax, etc. (2013Gudan13757). On October 22, 2015, the court rendered a judgment revoking each of the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax, etc. on the same date, and the head of the regional tax office rendered a judgment revoking the respective of the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax, etc. on the same date.