1. The part against the Plaintiff regarding confirmation of invalidation under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.

Defendant.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal or addition of some contents as follows. Thus, it is cited by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of

No. 3 of the 3th part of the addition or dismissal shall be subject to the second disposition of the case.

"B" is the second disposition of this case.

The Tax Tribunal shall add “1. 25 January 25, 2016,” following the third 12th 12th , to “the Tax Tribunal.” The third 15th c. “Determination as to the legitimacy of the action” shall be deemed to read “2. Determination, etc. as to the lawfulness of the action.” The fourth 19th d. “Defendant” shall be deemed to read “the Plaintiff.” The fourth 5th 19th 5th 5th 5th 19th 5th 1st 6th 6th 1st 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th

【A continuing to exist (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Nu3909, Aug. 22, 1995). Such circumstance alone does not necessarily mean that there is no benefit to seek confirmation of invalidity of imposition of KRW 2,439,180, which is the remainder of imposition of KRW 2,439,180, except for the unlawful portion due to lack of eligibility among the disposition No. 2 of the instant lawsuit. (c) In conclusion, the part seeking confirmation of invalidity of imposition of KRW 2,439,180, among the disposition of imposition of local income tax and imposition of KRW 2,439,180, among the disposition of imposition of KRW 2,439,180, the part seeking confirmation of imposition of KRW 2,647,130, among the disposition of imposition of local income tax of the instant lawsuit of the instant case, is unlawful, and thus, the part seeking confirmation of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 2,439,180.