1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff concluded a contract for real estate consulting services with the seller of C, D, E, F, G, H, and real estate (hereinafter “instant land”) in Namyang-si, Namyang-si, and 17,064 square meters in total (hereinafter “the instant land”), respectively, and entered into a contract for real estate consulting services with the buyer company, Alvidi case, E, Gai Development Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Friju Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Liuri-si, Inc., Ltd.

When the sale and purchase contract of the instant land was concluded between the above seller and the buyer, and the ownership was transferred, the Plaintiff received 4.5 billion won from the seller as service price in 2008, and 1.87 billion won from the buyer, respectively. When filing a return of the comprehensive income tax belonging to the year 2008, the Plaintiff filed a return on the total amount of 5.587 billion won from the buyer as other income (hereinafter “the instant money”).

B. On March 12, 2014, the Defendant deemed the instant money as not other income but as business income, and subsequently notified the Plaintiff of KRW 856,996,720 as global income tax for the year 2008.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition, but was dismissed on May 28, 2014, and was requested to the Tax Tribunal on August 20, 2014, but was dismissed on November 3, 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s service provided to the seller and the buyer in relation to the instant land is a lump sum and contingent, and thus, the instant disposition is unlawful, although the instant money, which is the price, cannot be deemed business income. 2) The instant disposition is unlawful, even if the instant money is deemed business income, as a result of the Plaintiff’s service provision, concluded a sales contract with the seller of the instant land on July 26, 2007, and KRW 3 billion.