1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. (1) On December 12, 2014, the Plaintiff is the Director of the National Forest Administration B of the Southern District Forest Administration (hereinafter “Director”).

(C) as shown in Table 1 and the following [Attachment 1]:

3) As to the Plaintiff’s forest products, the Plaintiff’s forest products (hereinafter “instant forest products”) can be deemed as constituting “instant forest products”).

(1) The State-owned forest products sales contract is concluded to purchase KRW 207,800,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”) for the purchase of KRW 207,800.

() On December 17, 2014, the instant forest products were acquired. The instant forest products were acquired on December 17, 2014. On December 12, 2014, the acquisition tax on the instant forest products was not reported and paid to the Defendant on December 17, 2014, including pine trees of 405,000 square meters, located in the place of the contract date, and KRW 25,332.13 square meters, on December 12, 2014.

B. On July 30, 2015, the Minister of Government Administration and Home Affairs notified each local government, including the Defendant, as “materials for the sale of state-owned trees” and notified each local government, including the Defendant, of the subject matter of acquisition tax to be additionally collected according to the above sales data. The above sales data include the instant forest products acquired by the Plaintiff according to the instant contract. Accordingly, on September 10, 2015, the Defendant imposed acquisition tax on the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff did not pay acquisition tax on the acquisition of standing trees, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not pay acquisition tax on the acquisition of the instant forest products, even if he acquired the instant forest products, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not pay acquisition tax on the acquisition of standing trees.

(hereinafter “Disposition of this case”). 【Ground of recognition】 Facts having no dispute, the purport of the entire pleadings, and the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Whether the disposition of this case is void automatically

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant forest product does not constitute “standing timber” under Article 7(1) of the Local Tax Act, which is the “drained timber” or “dembing timber.” As such, the instant disposition is unlawful.

In addition, acquisition tax on the acquisition of such raw timber shall not be imposed under the Local Tax Act.