1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On January 18, 2011, the Plaintiff is a corporation established with real estate sales business, real estate rental business, etc. as its objective business in Sungnam-dong, Sungnam-dong, Sungnam-dong, 5101-502, the over-concentration control region under the Seoul Metropolitan Area Readjustment Planning Act (hereinafter “large city”).

B. On March 31, 201, the date of incorporation of the Plaintiff, through a voluntary auction on real estate, acquired at KRW 881,50,00,00, Gi-dong, Gangdong-gu, Seoul Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On May 12, 2011, the Plaintiff reported the acquisition tax rate of KRW 8,815,00 calculated by applying the reduction rate of acquisition tax and the general acquisition tax rate of KRW 8815,00 and local education tax under Article 11 of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act to the Defendant on the ground that the acquisition of the instant real estate constitutes a housing cost transaction under Article 40-2 of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act, and made a registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate on May 20, 201, after paying the said amount on the following day.

C. Accordingly, the Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff acquired the instant real estate within a large city within five years after establishing a corporation in the Sungnam-si, which is a large city; and (b) calculated by applying the heavy taxation rate of acquisition tax under Article 13(2)1 of the Local Tax Act and the latter part of Article 27(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (the reduction rate under Article 40-2 of the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act shall be applied as it is), imposed an additional imposition and collection notice on KRW 8,815,00, acquisition tax, additional tax 1,792,080, and additional tax 2,121,40, total amount of KRW 12,728,480 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s instant disposition is unlawful for the following reasons.

The establishment of corporations, the establishment of branches and branch offices in a large city, and corporations.