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 October 14, 2010, the Plaintiff: (a) obtained 51% of the shares issued by Nonparty AFD Seoul Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”); and (b) obtained deemed acquisition tax on a building owned by the Nonparty Company pursuant to Article 105(6) of the former Local Tax Act (wholly amended by Act No. 10221, Mar. 31, 2010; hereinafter “former Local Tax Act”); and (c) imposed deemed acquisition tax on a building owned by the Nonparty Company 28-3 large 6,366§³ of Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

The case was satisfied.

B. However, on September 30, 2009, prior to becoming an oligopolistic stockholder of the non-party company, the Plaintiff already converted into a holding company under the Monopoly Regulation and Fair Trade Act (hereinafter “Fair Trade Act”), and thus, applied for reduction or exemption of local tax on the ground that it becomes eligible for exemption of deemed acquisition tax under Article 120(6) Subparagraph 8 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010) (hereinafter “instant provision on reduction or exemption”). Upon receipt of the said application by the Defendant, the Plaintiff reported and paid tax on KRW 211,842,860 (including special rural development tax and penalty tax) on November 19, 2010.

C. However, on May 18, 2015, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the correction of acquisition tax of KRW 1,626,623,100 (including additional tax, and only KRW 1,381,291,170, which deducts the refund of the already paid special rural development tax) and special rural development tax of KRW 162,62,62,30 (including 10% of acquisition tax and additional tax) on the ground that the Plaintiff was a general company other than the Plaintiff’s subsidiaries at the time of acquiring stocks of the non-party company.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). 【No dispute exists, entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 7, and 8, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion first, the plaintiff acquires 51% of the shares issued by the non-party company, and thereby becomes a non-party company.