1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 3, 2010, the Plaintiff transferred 34,95,000,000 won (hereinafter “the instant building”) to Veneia Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Non-Party Company”) and paid KRW 7,747,278,775,775 of capital gains tax on January 31, 201, to the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 559,330.6 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) and its ground buildings (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. From June 21, 2012 to July 10, 2012, the Defendant determined capital gains tax on the transfer of the instant case based on the standard market price, namely, the value divided in proportion to the transfer value according to the premise that the distinction between the transfer value of the instant land and the instant building is unclear, based on the premise that the transfer value of the instant land and the instant building is unclear.

C. The Plaintiff asserted that the special long-term holding deduction was insufficiently appropriated on the premise that the transfer value of the instant building is zero won, and filed a claim for rectification of KRW 49,054,907 with the Defendant on August 30, 2012, but the Defendant rejected such claim on the ground that the transfer value of the instant building cannot be deemed zero won on October 15, 2012.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

The plaintiff was under the procedure of the previous trial.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2 through 4, 6 through 7-2, 11, 12, Eul 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant building had no asset value due to the aging, and the Nonparty Company planned to remove the instant building and build a new building. In light of such circumstances, the Plaintiff and the Nonparty Company determined the transaction value of the instant building as zero won.

Therefore, the instant disposition based on the premise that the transfer value of the instant building is unclear is unlawful.

(b) as shown in the attached Form of the relevant statutes.

C. The facts of recognition were dated September 20, 2010 on the instant land and buildings.