1. Of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit, the part demanding revocation of the disposition imposing acquisition tax and local education tax as of March 10, 2013, and Plaintiff B’s lawsuit.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 16, 2012, the Plaintiffs concluded each sales contract for cement brickd house (hereinafter “D house”), cement brickd house (hereinafter “F house”), E, and cement brickd house (hereinafter “H house”), G and cement brickd house (hereinafter “H house”), and cement brickd house (hereinafter “H house”), and D house, F house, and H house collectively (hereinafter “each of the instant houses”).

The Plaintiffs paid the purchase and sale balance of D’s housing on August 2, 2012, the purchase and sale balance on F’s housing on September 6, 2012, and the purchase and sale balance on H’s housing on September 7, 2012, and acquired 1/2 co-ownership shares in each of the instant housing.

B. (1) On August 2, 2012, the Plaintiffs reported to the Defendant on the acquisition of D houses, and submitted an application for reduction or exemption to the effect that “Plaintiff A constitutes a temporary two house owner by owning an I apartment house 205 Dong 1104 (hereinafter “I apartment house”), but he/she would dispose of I apartment house within two years from the date of acquisition of D apartment house. Plaintiff B acquired a house of 90 million won or less as a price transaction, and became a single house owner,” and the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (Amended by Act No. 11487, Oct. 2, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply), Article 40-2 of the Local Tax Act, Article 10(1), Article 11(1)7 (b) of the Local Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 12118, Dec. 26, 2013; hereinafter the same shall apply) with the reduction or exemption of acquisition tax and local education tax by 50%.

(2) On September 6, 2012, the Plaintiffs reported the acquisition of F Housing and H Housing, and paid taxes by reducing 50% of the acquisition tax and local education tax by 50% pursuant to Article 40-2 of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act and Articles 10(1) and 11(1)7(b) of the Local Tax Act on the ground that the Plaintiffs constitute two houses temporarily.

C. The defendant examined the current status of housing ownership by the plaintiffs, and "the plaintiff A is a four house owner, the plaintiff B is a three house owner, and it does not constitute a temporary two house owner."