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 March 20, 1997, the Plaintiff newly constructed a building (the underground first floor, the third floor, the rooftop) on the land owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant land”) and obtained approval for the use thereof. On May 21, 1997, the Plaintiff completed registration of the preservation of ownership of the said building in the future of the Plaintiff.

Since then, the Plaintiff extended the fourth floor of the above building, and registered the fourth floor extended on August 1, 2014 in the general building ledger upon obtaining approval for use pursuant to the Act on Special Measures for the Arrangement of Specific Buildings (established by Korea-style Law No. 11930, Jul. 16, 2013; hereinafter “Specific Building Act”) from January 17, 2014 to January 16, 2015.

B. On December 28, 2018, the Plaintiff transferred the instant land and the 4th floor building thereon (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant housing”) at KRW 2.4 billion (hereinafter referred to as “instant transfer”).

The Plaintiff, as a multi-family house of this case, deemed the instant house to be subject to non-taxation (high-priced house), reported and paid KRW 37,766,880 to the Defendant for the transfer income tax reverted to year 2018.

C. After that, on May 8, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a revised return and paid KRW 189,761,460 on the premise that only one household is exempt from capital gains tax, and the remaining part of the house is subject to taxation.

However, on July 16, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a request for correction with the Defendant for refund of KRW 189,761,460 of the capital gains tax by asserting that the instant house constitutes a multi-family house subject to non-taxation for one household as a multi-family house.

Accordingly, on July 24, 2019, the Defendant rendered a decision rejecting the Plaintiff’s request for correction (hereinafter “disposition rejecting the instant correction”), deeming that the instant four floors were used as housing at the time of the instant transfer to meet the requirements for multi-family houses under subparagraph 1 of attached Table 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Building Act.

After that, the defendant on August 2019.