1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On June 20, 2014, the Plaintiff acquired ownership at a successful bid of 992 square meters (137 square meters in B miscellaneous land at the time of strike, following a merger or division; hereinafter “instant real estate”) in B miscellaneous land at the time of strike, and on the same day, calculated by applying the tax rate (475, Dec. 27, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) under Article 11(1)7 (b) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 14475, Dec. 27, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) to the Defendant regarding the acquisition of the instant real estate to the tax rate of 178,462,00 won in acquisition tax (40/1,00), local education tax, 17,846,200 won in local education tax, if calculated pursuant to Article 151(1)1 of the former Local Tax Act.

[A. (40/1,00 - 20/1,00) x 20/100] A. Special rural development tax is calculated in accordance with Article 5(1)6 of the Act on Special Rural Development Tax of 8,923,100, the tax rate is 2/1,000.

(i) paid 2/100 x 10/100).

On September 28, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a request for correction to the effect that the acquisition of the instant real estate by auction constitutes original acquisition, and that the tax rate under Article 11(1)3 of the former Local Tax Act (28/1,000) should be changed in the case of acquisition tax, and that the acquisition tax rate should be applied 16/10,00 (28/1,000 - 20/1,00) x 20/100 as the acquisition tax rate is changed as above. However, on November 28, 2018, the Defendant issued a disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s request for correction on the ground that the acquisition by auction does not constitute original acquisition.

(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to whether the disposition of this case was legitimate or not, as the disposition of this case was cancelled in the course of acquiring the real estate in this case at the auction procedure, constitutes original acquisition, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion is deemed as acquisition by succession of the real estate in this case, even though it constitutes acquisition by succession.