1. On July 13, 2016, the Defendant imposed capital gains tax of KRW 317,694,050 on the Plaintiff for the year 2014.

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff owned 1/2 shares in the Seoul Gangnam-gu land (hereinafter “instant land”) and 37.1 shares in the building on its ground (hereinafter “instant building”), 37.2 shares in C, D, E, F and G, and 118.32 shares in H (hereinafter “the Plaintiff’s ownership part of the instant land and buildings”) and 118.32 shares in H, and 1/2 shares in the instant real estate; 1/2 shares in the instant land; 1/2 shares in the Plaintiff’s father; 70.1 shares in the underground floor, J, K, L, M and G among the instant building; 1/2 shares in the instant land; 70.2 shares in the underground floor, 187.68 shares in H among the instant building (hereinafter “the part of the instant land and buildings”).

On September 16, 2014, the Plaintiff transferred the instant real estate at KRW 4.5 billion to N andO (hereinafter “transferees”), and I transferred the instant real estate at KRW 6.5 billion to the transferee on the same day.

After that, the Plaintiff reported and paid the transfer income tax to the Defendant with the transfer value of the instant real estate as KRW 4.5 billion. However, the Defendant, by calculating the transfer value of the instant real estate and I real estate in accordance with Article 100(2) of the Income Tax Act, deemed the transfer value of the instant real estate as KRW 5,417,359,409 and notified the Plaintiff of the rectification of KRW 317,694,050 for the transfer income tax for the year 2014, on July 12, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on October 7, 2016, but was dismissed on February 7, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] without any dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul's evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleading as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate or not, the plaintiff asserted that the disposition of this case is legitimate, shall not receive the remaining money from the transferee in addition to the transfer value of the real estate

Therefore, the Defendant’s disposition based on the premise that the transfer value of the instant real estate is KRW 5,417,359,409 is based on the substance over form principle and the principle of no taxation without law.