1. The Defendant’s imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 526,162,760 against the Plaintiff on February 1, 2010, 392,565.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 19, 2003, the Plaintiff acquired a 1.52 billion square meters (c hotel; hereinafter “instant real estate”) of B, 836 square meters in Seosan-si and its ground building 2,423.7 square meters in total (hereinafter “C hotel”) from 1.5 billion won, and performed remodeling work. On July 24, 2003, the Plaintiff transferred the said real estate to D with KRW 2.9 billion (unregistered).

B. On February 1, 2010, the Defendant decided and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 1,298,792,250 of transfer income tax for the year 2003 (hereinafter “instant initial disposition”) with the transfer value of the instant real estate KRW 2.9 billion, acquisition value of KRW 1.52 billion, and necessary expenses as KRW 122,650,00.

C. In the appeal procedure of the instant disposition, the Plaintiff additionally recognized KRW 871,670,000 as necessary expenses, and accordingly, the Defendant corrected the tax amount on December 8, 201 to KRW 526,162,760 (hereinafter “instant disposition”) by reducing the remaining part of the original disposition to KRW 526,162,760 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 3, 4 evidence, Eul 6 to 23 evidence (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff asserts that the disposition of this case is unlawful for the following reasons.

(1) The Plaintiff asserted that the instant real estate is not an unregistered pre-sale is nothing more than preparing a sales contract for the instant real estate to D with the delegation of E, the former owner of the instant real estate, and therefore, it is not a pre-sale of the instant real estate.

(2) Even if the Plaintiff asserted the transfer value of the instant real estate to D with KRW 2.9 billion, the Plaintiff should calculate the transfer margin by using the transfer value of KRW 2.7 billion as the transfer value, even if the Plaintiff transferred the instant real estate from D with the purchase value of the instant real estate as the substitute for D’s real estate (three parcels, such as land F, etc. in the official city) in lieu of KRW 600 million, but the market price of the said substitute real estate was merely KRW 400 million in fact.

(3) The Plaintiff asserted necessary expenses, etc.