1. Property tax of 160,330 won (including urban areas), local education tax of the Plaintiff on July 10, 2014 (including urban areas), 20,550 won, and local education tax.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On June 7, 2005, the Plaintiff purchased KRW 1207 (hereinafter “instant officetel”) of the said building from D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) which is the executory company of the building C, located outside Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul, Yeongdeungpo-gu, and 24 lots of land (hereinafter “D”) in KRW 142,070,95. However, it appears that the Plaintiff and D had the same sales contract between the Plaintiff and D on July 30, 2003 with respect to the instant officetel.

(hereinafter) The sales contract concluded between the Plaintiff and D was paid in full on the same day D.

B. On July 10, 2014, the Defendant: (a) deemed the Plaintiff as the de facto owner of the instant officetel; and (b) imposed and collected property tax of 160,330 won on the Plaintiff in 2014 (i.e., property tax of 102,780 won for an urban area of property tax of 57,50 won for a building); (c) imposed and collected local education tax of 20,550 won; and (d)

(hereinafter “each disposition of this case”). (c)

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal on August 26, 2014, but was dismissed by the Tax Tribunal on January 27, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5 (including the relevant branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether each of the dispositions of this case is legitimate

(a) as shown in the Attachment of the relevant statutes;

B. According to Article 142(1)2 and Article 143 subparag. 7 of the Local Tax Act regarding the determination of imposition of local resource and facility tax among the dispositions in the instant case, local resource and facility tax is subject to taxation of fire-fighting systems, garbage disposal facilities, irrigation facilities, and other public facilities of a person who benefits from such facilities, ships, and land (hereinafter “specific real estate”), and the owner of a specific real estate is liable to pay local resource and facility tax

The Plaintiff is not liable to pay local resource and facility tax on the ground that there is no dispute between the parties that the Plaintiff is not the owner of the instant officetel.

Therefore, the imposition of local resource facility tax on each of the dispositions in this case.