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 May 22, 2003, the Plaintiff acquired Seongdong-gu Seoul Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Sub-heading Category B (hereinafter “instant house”) and on May 4, 2012, the plan for the management and disposal of a house redevelopment project was approved pursuant to Article 48 of the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and acquired the occupant status on the same day (hereinafter “the occupation right of the instant case”).

On June 21, 2016, the Plaintiff transferred the association member's relocation right of this case in KRW 610,000,000 (hereinafter referred to as the “transfer of this case”).

B. On June 27, 2016, on the premise that Article 89(1)3(a) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 14389, Dec. 20, 2016) and Article 155(17(1)1(a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 27829, Feb. 3, 2017) should be applied to the transfer of this case, the Plaintiff reported the transfer income tax (tax amount of KRW 0) for the year 2016 to the Defendant.

C. On January 10, 2019, the Defendant issued a revised and notified the Plaintiff’s transfer income tax of KRW 127,624,570 (including additional tax) for the year 2016 on the ground that the Plaintiff owned a long-term rental house under 4, other than the instant association member’s relocation right, and the special provisions on non-taxation of occupancy rights cannot be applied.

(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition of this case").

The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit upon a request by the Tax Tribunal.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 11, Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In case where the Plaintiff’s alleged residential house and long-term residential house owned and transferred the residential house, the special case of non-taxation for one household is applied pursuant to Article 89(1)3(a) of the former Income Tax Act and Article 155(19) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act.

However, there is no reason to regard the association member's relocation right of this case differently from the house as the telegraph of the house of this case.

Therefore, "Special Cases concerning Non-taxation of Occupancy Rights" are different.