1. All appeals by the plaintiffs and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this part of the judgment on Plaintiff A’s claim is as follows: (a) the Defendant, on January 9, 2012, included income from the sale and purchase of the instant real estate in the business income, and the global income tax of KRW 96,762,700 (3,000,000,000, which should be calculated as necessary expenses) was accepted by the Plaintiff’s objection, and KRW 1,050,000 among them was revoked.

2) The instant disposition was imposed (hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”).

(a)in addition, Article 18 of the Income Tax Act and Article 10 of the Chapter 12 of the same Act shall not apply to “A” with “Evidence 1, 6, 9, 1, 18” respectively, and Article 18 of the Income Tax Act of the first instance below, and Article 4 of the Chapter 10 of the same Act.

Article 101(2)2 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21934, Dec. 31, 2009; Presidential Decree No. 21934, Dec. 2, 2009; Presidential Decree No. 21934, Dec. 31, 2009; Presidential Decree No. 21358, Dec. 2, 200

2. Determination as to the plaintiff B's claim

A. (1) The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the judgment of the court of first instance as to the imposition of gift tax is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since this part of the judgment of the court of first instance as to the imposition of gift tax is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except in accordance with Article 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows.

2) Under the 4th judgment of the first instance court, Plaintiff B acquired 13 real estate and sales right (including the case where the sales contract is rescinded and the down payment is appropriated for penalty) from June 4, 2002 to April 15, 2008. The Defendant deemed that Plaintiff B received a donation from Plaintiff A in total of KRW 1,395,000,000, and the source amount falls short of 1,311,00,000,000,000 won and received from Plaintiff A and Party H 84,000.