beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On November 29, 2010, the Plaintiff was awarded a successful bid of KRW 562,311,100 in total, on the 17th floor C with the 17th floor above B, Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “B”) Nos. 41, 42, and 42-1 (hereinafter “instant real estate” in total, and the individual real estate refers to the family room alone) of the 17th floor C with the 17th floor above ground.
B. Article 4(2) of the Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12153, Jan. 1, 2014; hereinafter “Local Tax Act”) on May 31, 2012 and May 31, 2013; and Article 4(3) and (7) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the Mayor of Seoul Special Metropolitan City changed the annual standard market prices of each of the parts of the instant real estate and determined and announced the change of the annual standard prices of the parts of the instant real estate as follows:
(No. 2012-142, 2013-173. Division: Subparagraph 41 82, 60, 621, 598, 911, 040 Subparagraph 42, 662.51, 662.51, 1,004, 794, 42-1, 493, 118.61, 87,065, 717, 717, 784, 73. 1,863.78, 863.70m2, 863.70m2, 1,368, 863.70m2, 1,3687, 197, 2974, 297, 2984, 297, 3984, 257, 2984, 716 [2012, 2012.
C. Pursuant to Article 11 of the Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Real Estate Act (hereinafter “Public Notice Act”) and Article 16 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the Defendant respectively determined and publicly announced the officially assessed individual land price of B land as KRW 5,380,000 per square meter as of January 1, 2012, and KRW 5,390,000 per square meter as of January 1, 2013, respectively, on May 31, 2012 and May 31, 2013.
(hereinafter referred to as the Defendant’s decision on the officially assessed individual land price in 2013 (hereinafter “instant land price disposition”).
Based on the above statutory standard price and the officially assessed individual land price, the Defendant calculated the property tax base as follows and added the property tax, local resource facility tax, and local education tax for the Plaintiff in 2012 and 2013.