1. The plaintiff's claim that was changed in exchange in this court is dismissed.

2. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Details of the disposition

A. On September 7, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred land B in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and reported and paid KRW 450,665,762 of the transfer income tax reverted to year 2015.

B. On September 4, 1986, the Plaintiff acquired the house located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter referred to as the “Gu house”) and reconstructed the Gu house. On November 18, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the correction of the transfer income tax with the Defendant by asserting that: (a) the sum of the relevant building and the relevant land reconstructed to his children on November 18, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “instant house”); and (b) the transfer loss (△△ KRW 205,729,839) was incurred; and (c) the Plaintiff filed a claim for the partial refund of the transfer income tax with the Defendant.

C. Under the premise that the reconstruction association is not an investment in kind, the Defendant calculated the acquisition value of land portion among the instant housing as of September 4, 1986, which was the time of acquisition of the old housing, and determined the transfer income tax refund amount to KRW 45,392,120 on April 18, 2016, and issued a disposition rejecting the Plaintiff’s remaining request for correction (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed a request for examination with the Commissioner of the National Tax Service on July 5, 2016, but was dismissed on October 4, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 3, Eul evidence 4-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. In calculating the transfer income tax on the transfer of the instant house alleged by the Plaintiff, the time of acquisition of the part of land among the instant housing shall be deemed to be September 1, 200, which the Plaintiff invested in kind in the reconstruction association of the old housing. Based on this, the acquisition value of the part of land among the instant housing shall be calculated.

Nevertheless, under the premise that the old house is not invested in the reconstruction association, the defendant is based on the standard market price of the part of the land of the old house at September 4, 1986, which was the time of acquisition of the old house.