1. The Defendant’s imposition of each disposition on August 10, 2013 against the Plaintiff is revoked.

2...

1. Details of the disposition;

A. A long-term care center for the aged operated by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant welfare center”) is a long-term care institution designated as a long-term care institution for long-term care on August 21, 2009 pursuant to Article 32 of the Act on Long-Term Care Insurance for the Aged, which provides the beneficiaries, such as the aged, with visiting care and home bathing benefits.

B. In operating the instant welfare center, the Defendant confirmed that the number of employees paid by the Plaintiff during the period from August 201 to December 12, 2013 and from January 5, 2013 exceeded 50 per month. On August 10, 2013, the Defendant imposed on the Plaintiff a total of KRW 1,929,650 (including additional tax) for the pro rata employee portion of local income tax from August 201 to December 201 and from January 5, 2013 as shown in the attached Table 1.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On September 9, 2013, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and requested for adjudication on September 9, 2013, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s request on March 18, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including branch numbers for those with a satisfy number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The instant welfare center operated by the Plaintiff is a long-term care institution under Article 2 subparag. 4 of the Act on Long-Term Care Benefits for the Aged and its purpose of social welfare services under Article 2 subparag. 1 of the Social Welfare Services Act.

Therefore, the instant welfare center constitutes a “social welfare corporation, etc.” under the main sentence of Article 22(1) of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act, and thus, the Plaintiff operating the instant welfare center was exempted from the pro rata employee portion of local income tax pursuant to Article 22(3) of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act, despite the fact that the instant disposition

(2) The defendant's assertion of this case is operated by the plaintiff.