1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff, as the owner of the Busan-gu B land (area 73.9 square meters; hereinafter “instant land”) and the building on its ground (area 4,579.55 square meters, prior to the extension of the total floor area of 117.26 square meters of storage facilities on October 15, 2015; hereinafter “instant building”), leased the entire first floor (area 574.8 square meters on the building ledger; hereinafter “instant business site”) among the instant building to C. From October 30, 2013, the Plaintiff leased the entire first floor (area 574.8 square meters on the building ledger; hereinafter “instant business site”). From October 30, 2013, the Plaintiff engaged in entertainment bar business under the trade name “D (hereinafter “instant business”).

In imposing property tax, etc. on the instant land in 2015, the Defendant determined that the instant business establishment constitutes a business place that has a dancing space separated from guest seats under Article 28(5)4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act, and applied the heavy taxation rate to 57.97 square meters of land attached to the instant business place (limited to 362.89 square meters of the actual business place), among the instant land, the Defendant imposed property tax on the Plaintiff on September 8, 2015, totaling KRW 79,767,930, total amount of property tax, local education tax, and KRW 13,200,510.

(2) The Plaintiff, as a result of the instant disposition, filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on November 26, 2015, against the instant disposition, on the part of the property tax of KRW 27,872,90, and the local education tax of KRW 5,574,580 (hereinafter “instant disposition”). However, on May 23, 2016, the Plaintiff was dismissed to file an appeal on the instant disposition.

[Grounds for recognition] The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul’s evidence Nos. 2, 5, and 6, and the purport of the entire pleadings is legitimate. The Plaintiff’s establishment of the instant business provides services to allow young customers, including undergraduate students, to enjoy and dance various events by reflecting the drinking culture of young young customers.