1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants and the appeal by the director of Seoul Regional Tax Office are all dismissed.

2. The plaintiff.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for adding the judgment of the plaintiff's assertion at the appellate court to the following paragraph (2). Thus, it is accepted by the main text of Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 4

The fifth written judgment of the court of first instance is "0. 0. 00" in the fifth written judgment of the court of first instance as " October 2007".

The 6th sentence of the first instance court's 9th sentence "I am in front" is considered as "I am in front."

The following matters shall be added to the 6th sentence of the first instance court, and the 15th sentence shall be referred to as "ma" (hereinafter referred to as "the 15th sentence").

d)According to Gap evidence Nos. 12, 32, and Eul evidence Nos. 23, X’s investigation, "30,000 won transferred to Eul on September 19, 2006 is the sale price of Chapter 2, and 14,00,000 won transferred on January 3, 2007 is the sale price of Chapter 1, and 33,000,00,000 won transferred on October 5, 207 is the sale price of Chapter 1, Chapter 1, 200, 30,000, 000, 30.0,000, 1,000, 30,000, 1,000, 20,000, 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00.