1. Acquisition tax of 18,00,000,000, local education tax of the Defendant against the Plaintiff on November 19, 2013, and special rural development tax of 1,80,000, and special rural development tax.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On October 1, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with A for the purchase price of KRW 450,000,000 for the land of KRW 863 square meters, KRW 367 square meters, and KRW 1,141 square meters (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant land”) prior to Gwangju-si, Gwangju-si (hereinafter referred to as “instant sales contract”), which is owned by A, and agreed to enter into a sales contract for the land of KRW 450,000,000 for the intermediate payment and remainder without paying the down payment and receive the registration of ownership transfer on October 22, 2013.

B. On October 22, 2013, the Plaintiff obtained a loan of KRW 200,00,000 from the Industrial Bank of Korea as security, and repaid KRW 153,82,575 with interest on a loan from the first monthly agricultural cooperative as security, and paid KRW 153,82,575 to A, respectively, on October 28, 2013.

On the other hand, on October 22, 2013, the Plaintiff reported and paid 18,00,000,000 won for acquisition tax on the instant land, local education tax amounting to KRW 1,80,000, and special rural development tax amounting to KRW 900,00 for the Defendant.

C. On November 18, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a claim for correction pursuant to Article 51 of the Framework Act on Local Taxes to the Defendant on the ground that “the instant sales contract was rescinded by agreement with A on October 29, 2013,” but the Defendant is not liable for the payment of acquisition tax, etc.... However, on November 19, 2013, the Defendant’s refusal disposition against the Plaintiff’s request for correction on the ground that the payment date is confirmed in sales contract, real estate transaction declaration certificate, transaction partner director, etc.

A. [In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4 through 6, 9, 12, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, 5 and 6, each entry of No. 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. On October 29, 2013, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion as to the Plaintiff’s claim 1, 201, rescinded the instant sales contract with the Plaintiff without paying any balance.