1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. Of the instant lawsuit, attached Form 1, which the Defendant against the Plaintiff on February 5, 2016.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the disposition are based on the three-party 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the reasons why the court stated this part are “reinfinite...........” The fourth party 1.

B. (3) The following is added, and except for the addition of “B No. 11” to the grounds for recognition, it is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. As such, it is cited pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. hereinafter “4) Of the instant disposition on July 5, 2019, the part on the imposition of gift tax No. 1 on [Attachment 1] among the instant disposition on July 5, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as “the part on the imposition of gift tax by the sequence of each disposition indicated in the aforementioned detailed list

) When the first instance judgment, which revoked the Plaintiff’s remaining claims and dismissed the Plaintiff’s remaining claims, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff on December 12, 2019 that the Plaintiff revoked the part of the imposition of gift tax No. 1 No. 5635, Dec. 12, 2019.

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the disposition imposing gift tax No. 1 No. 1

A. On the ground that the Plaintiff sought revocation of the disposition imposing gift tax No. 1 No. 1, the Defendant asserts that the part claiming revocation of the above disposition among the lawsuits in this case is unlawful as there is no legal interest in the lawsuit, since the Defendant revoked ex officio the part claiming revocation of the disposition imposing gift tax No. 1.

B. As seen earlier, as seen earlier, as the Defendant revoked ex officio the disposition imposing gift tax No. 1 of the instant disposition in the trial, the above disposition part is nonexistent. As such, the part claiming revocation of the disposition imposing gift tax No. 1 of the instant lawsuit in the instant lawsuit has no interest in the lawsuit seeking revocation. Therefore, the Defendant’s principal safety defense is with merit.

3. Determination as to whether each gift tax imposition disposition Nos. 2 and 3 is lawful

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that title trust of shares issued with capital increase is against B.