1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (the plaintiff).

1. The following facts may be acknowledged either as a dispute between the parties or as a whole by taking account of the overall purport of the evidence presented by the Plaintiff.

In 190, the Defendant: (a) newly constructed the five-story apartment on the land B in 1990 and sold it to three households among them; (b) newly constructed the six households of multi-household housing on the D site to sell four households among them; (c) newly built and sold the six households of multi-household housing on the E site; (d) newly built the three-story multi-household housing in the name of G owner on the F site; and (e) filed a final tax base return on global income tax for the tax year 1990, around May 191; (c) calculated the amount of income for the pertinent year based on the amount of global income (including the amount of income for the Plaintiff 416,80,000,000,000 won for multi-household housing; and (d) calculated the amount of income for the pertinent year based on the amount of income for the remaining real estate excluding three households among the detached housing and fourth multi-household housing in 196; (c) calculated the amount of global income tax for 205 years and 75 years,07.85 years.

B. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the instant disposition under Seoul High Court Seoul High Court Decision 97Gu4199 on January 29, 1997, but was dismissed on January 22, 1998, on the following grounds: (a) one household among the apartment units (i) transfers land to C, and (b) the sales price for three households among the six households of multi-household housing, is the husband of G, who is the landowner, and is the partner of H; and (c) the instant disposition that included each of the above payments in the Plaintiff’s income, was unlawful.

Accordingly, the plaintiff is the Supreme Court on January 31, 1998.