1. The Defendant’s value-added tax of KRW 15,532,270, and value-added tax of KRW 155,532,270, which was imposed on the Plaintiff on July 1, 2013, and KRW 1,012.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On April 8, 2011 and May 31, 2011, the Plaintiff acquired more than 36 households of national housing scale than 1,747,233,641 won (hereinafter “instant apartment”) located in Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si as a substitute for the claim for construction payment, and leased the instant apartment to another party during the second to second to 2012 period.

B. The Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff’s lease of the instant apartment constitutes the supply of goods under Article 6(2) of the former Value-Added Tax Act (wholly amended by Act No. 11873, Jun. 7, 2013; hereinafter the same) and Article 15(1)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (wholly amended by Presidential Decree No. 24638, Jun. 28, 2013; hereinafter the same), deeming that the lease of the instant apartment was the exclusive use of the building for sale subject to value-added tax for which value-added tax is exempted; and (b) deemed that the Plaintiff’s lease constitutes the supply of goods under Article 15(1)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value-Added Tax Act (wholly amended by Presidential Decree No. 24638, Jun. 28, 2013; 2011; and (c) notified the Plaintiff of KRW 15,532,270;

(hereinafter referred to as "the disposition of this case". (c)

On September 27, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed to the Tax Tribunal, but the said claim was dismissed on January 20, 2014.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 6, 12, Eul's 1 (including the family identification number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. (1) The plaintiff's assertion (1) is merely a temporary lease of the apartment of this case, and is not leased as part of the housing rental business. Thus, it does not constitute a private supply due to the exclusive use of tax exemption under Article 6 (2) of the former Value-Added Tax Act and Article 15 (1) 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Value

Therefore, on the different premise.