beta
Text
1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
On March 10, 2014, the acquisition tax against the plaintiff on March 10, 2018.
Reasons
1. Grounds for the court's explanation concerning this case is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance 2.
D. In addition to the following cases, “judgments” portion is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Parts to be dried;
D. 1) According to the above facts found in the part of the kindergarten building, Diplomatic Association entrusted the registration title of the kindergarten building B, which is a general title trust between two parties, and the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter “Real Estate Real Name Act”).
A) The enforcement of the title trust agreement entered into between D school association and B is null and void, and registration of ownership preservation, which has been completed in the future in relation to a kindergarten building B, based on the title trust agreement, is null and void. Therefore, even though the inheritor, including the Plaintiff, comprehensively succeeded to the status of trustee in the title trust relationship, such agreement is merely merely a succession to the duty to cancel the registration of ownership preservation on the kindergarten building that B bears to D school association, and it is not a succession to the ownership of the building, and as long as the registration of inheritance was not completed, it cannot be deemed as a real estate acquisition under Article 7 (1) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12153, Jan. 1, 2014). Ultimately, in light of the circumstances surrounding the acquisition of the land in this case by the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s assertion related to this part pointing this out is with merit, and it is difficult for the buyer to view that the land in this case was acquired by B and D at the time of the annexation.