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 April 30, 2009, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for forest B 2,941 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in Seongdong-gu, Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-si on the ground of an agreement on the acquisition of public land. On May 12, 2009, the Plaintiff received KRW 398,505,000 as compensation, and did not file a return of capital gains tax by May 31, 2010, which is the deadline for filing the final return of capital gains tax.

Since then, on April 30, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a return after the deadline for the transfer income of the instant real estate and paid the tax amount, but the penalty tax and penalty tax for unfaithful payment were not reported and paid.

B. Around October 2014, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the notice of imposition of penalty taxes for insincere in filing a report on the transfer income of the instant real estate and penalty taxes for insincere in filing a tax notice. On October 24, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for pre-assessment review with the Defendant, but received non-adopted decision on December 3, 2014.

On February 1, 2015, the Defendant imposed penalty tax of KRW 9,290,876 on the Plaintiff and penalty tax of KRW 15,943,144 on the Plaintiff’s failure to file a return on capital gains tax (hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on March 11, 2015, but was dismissed on May 29, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Gap evidence 3-4, Gap evidence 4, Eul evidence 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was accepted three times, and the tax authority first notified the Plaintiff of the transfer income tax when accepting the first and second expropriations, the public officials of Sungnam-si informed the Plaintiff that taxes will be exempted in the case of the third expropriations, and the Plaintiff filed a return after the deadline to the Defendant after having known that the transfer income tax should be paid to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff did not have any intention of tax avoidance, and the Plaintiff filed a return of tax base after the deadline pursuant to Article 45-3(3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes.