Seoul Administrative Court 2014Guhap50491 ( November 19, 2013)

2013west 3694 ( November 19, 2013)

Whether the old house transfer contract can be seen as a false double contract

(The same as the judgment of the court of first instance) Preparing and submitting a false double contract which states the sale price understating in order to grant credibility to the false declaration price and conceal the actual transaction price constitutes a fraud or other unlawful act as an active deception.

Article 26-2 of Framework Act

Seoul High Court 2014Nu50820

Sponsorary Appointment

O Head of tax office

Seoul Administrative Court Decision 2014Guhap50491 decided May 2, 2014

oly 2, 2014

oly 23, 2014

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The disposition taken by the Defendant on March 7, 2013 by the Plaintiff on March 7, 2013 is revoked.

The reason for the judgment of the first instance is reasonable, and therefore, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, the main sentence of Article 420 of the

by reason of this judgment. (However, the first instance court's decision No. 16 of the first instance court's decision

The phrase "any process", "208du109522", "208du109522", "1008du10522", and "a limitation on the old house", of the 8th page 12, shall be deemed "the old house", respectively.

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed for lack of reason.