1. On February 10, 2014, the Defendant imposed each tax on the Plaintiff on the details of the attached disposition.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On December 7, 2006, the Haston Development Institute Co., Ltd. reported the establishment of a lifelong educational facility related to knowledge and human resources development projects under Article 38(3) of the former Lifelong Education Act (amended by Act No. 12339, Jan. 28, 2014; hereinafter the same) with respect to the land and its above ground (hereinafter “instant educational facility”) located in 80-11, Gosong-dong, Young-dong, Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Mandong (hereinafter “instant educational facility”).

B. On August 4, 2009, the Plaintiff purchased the educational facilities of this case from the Hadice semiconductor Co., Ltd. and completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 29, 2009. On the other hand, the Plaintiff succeeded to the status as the founder of the education facilities of this case from the Hadice Resource Development Institute Co., Ltd. as the founder of the education facilities of this case, and reported the succession to the status of the installer to the superintendent of education of Gyeonggi-do, who is the competent authority around November 2009, and received the pertinent certificate on December 17,

C. After the commencement of the construction project for the extension of the pertinent educational facility, the Plaintiff completed the construction project on May 2012, and then filed a report with the competent authority on the modification of the name and interior facilities of the pertinent educational facility, and received the relevant certificate of report on May 21, 2012.

However, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the instant educational facility constitutes a lifelong educational establishment subject to the reduction or exemption of property tax, etc. under Article 44 of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act; and (b) subsequently, the Defendant did not impose property tax, etc. on the pertinent educational facility; (c) on the ground that, as a result of an on-site investigation of the instant educational facility, only the Plaintiff and its executives and employees are undergoing education in the said educational facility, and there is no curriculum intended for the general public; and (d) the said educational facility does not constitute a lifelong educational establishment subject to the reduction or exemption of local taxes. As such, the Plaintiff on December 11, 2013, including the details of the disposition on imposition in attached Form 393