1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 1, 2009, the name of the Plaintiff was “Seoul Seongdong-gu B and 3 floors”; the trade name was “C;” the type of business was “service;” and the type was “entrusted sale;” and the business registration (number: Sungdong Tax Office D) was completed on June 21, 201.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant business”). (b) The business indicated in the said business registration

On May 31, 201, the Defendant, who is the head of the Gu having jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s domicile on the Plaintiff’s resident registration, submitted a tax base of KRW 2,296,304 and tax amount of KRW 265,590 (hereinafter “instant local income tax”) with respect to the instant business under the Plaintiff’s name, but did not pay the instant local income tax (hereinafter “instant return”).

C. Accordingly, on September 10, 201, the Defendant determined the due date for payment with respect to the Plaintiff as of September 30, 201, and made a decision on the collection of the local income tax of this case (hereinafter “decision on collection of this case”) and on November 17, 201, sent the written decision on the collection of local income tax of this case to the Plaintiff’s resident registration address, but still did not pay the local income tax of this case.

On March 12, 2014, April 15, 2014, and May 15, 2014, the Defendant sent a written notice demanding the payment of KRW 265,590 of the instant local income tax and its additional 8,210 to the Plaintiff’s domicile on three occasions on the Plaintiff’s resident registration.

("Notice of each of the above Notice"). (e) Each of the above Notice of Notice of Payment is "Notice of each of the above Notice"

On June 19, 2014, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit. The first demand notice of each of the instant cases was based on the premise that it constitutes a tax imposition disposition. The Plaintiff stated the purport of the claim as “the Defendant’s revocation of the imposition disposition of KRW 282,030 against the Plaintiff on March 12, 2014, April 15, 2014, and May 15, 2014,” but on the premise that “the Defendant was issued a tax imposition disposition on May 31, 201 on the date of the first demand.”