1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part against the plaintiff falling under the order to revoke below shall be revoked.

Defendant.

1. The grounds for this part of the disposition by the court are stated are set forth in the first instance judgment.

In addition to the fact that “the Plaintiff has notified the Plaintiff of KRW 445,924,290 of the gift tax,” “The Plaintiff has determined and notified the E of KRW 445,924,290 of the gift tax,” the same as the stated in paragraph (1). As such, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Plaintiff’s tax investigation against the Plaintiff does not fall under the tax investigation under Article 81-6(3) of the Framework Act on National Taxes, but does not fall under the requirements for expanding the scope of the tax investigation under Article 81-9(1) of the Framework Act on National Taxes. As to the disposition of global income tax of this case, the disposition of this case must be revoked as it is based on the illegal tax investigation as above. (2) In order to satisfy the requirements of seven promoters at the time of establishment B of B, the Plaintiff trusted the shares of this case to F, G, H, and I, and later paid the dividend income tax under the name of the trustee for free increase of the amount of income and cash dividend. The Plaintiff did not have the purpose of tax evasion, and the report of global income tax pursuant to such title trust does not fall under the purpose of tax evasion, and thus is subject to the exclusion period of imposition for five years, and the imposition

3. In view of the fact that the title trust agreement on the instant disposition of capital gains tax is valid, and the ownership in the external relationship is transferred to and reverted to the trustee, and that the ownership is withheld to the truster in the internal relationship, the act of transferring the shares under the name of F to a third party and paying capital gains tax in the name of F cannot be deemed unlawful.

In addition, the plaintiff and F are the relatives by marriage within the fourth degree and the special relationship with D are equally applied.