1. Of the instant lawsuit, the part concerning the Plaintiff’s claim for revocation of imposition of local income tax against the head of Dongjak Tax Office.

Details of the disposition

The Plaintiff: (a) is a personal entrepreneur who runs a real estate rental business in the 15,089 square meters of B forest land in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun (divided into B forest land No. 8,331 square meters, C forest land No. 1,998 square meters, and D forest land No. 4,760 square meters, on June 15, 2015; hereinafter “instant real estate”); (b) is a company E, F, and G Co., Ltd (hereinafter “stock company” in the name of the company”), and individually leased the instant real estate to E, F, and G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “leased”), and filed a return on and payment of global income tax and value-added tax on the relevant rent from September 2008 to 2012.

The director of the Seoul Regional Tax Office, from June 29, 2017 to September 22, 2017, found that the Plaintiff prepared a false double-lease contract and under-reported the rental income using the borrowed account, and notified the Defendants of the relevant taxation data.

On October 10, 2017, the head of the Dongjak District Tax Office issued a revised notice of global income tax of 33,60,690 won, global income tax of 2009, global income tax of 156,030,460 won, global income tax of 2010, global income tax of 100,556,860 won, global income tax of 2011, global income tax of 264,083,170 won (hereinafter “instant disposition imposing global income tax”) and issued a revised notice of global income tax of 208 pursuant to Article 93(2) of the former Local Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 11873, Jun. 7, 2013), former Local Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 11873, Jun. 3, 201), local income tax of 3,360,060,000 won, local income tax of 15,040,2010

(2) On October 1, 2017, the head of the relevant regional income tax office (hereinafter “instant disposition imposing local income tax”). On October 1, 2017, the head of the relevant regional income tax office (hereinafter “the head of the relevant regional income tax”). On October 1, 2017, the head of the relevant regional income tax office assessed against the Plaintiff for KRW 11,065,060,380, value-added tax for the first year of 2009, value-added tax for the second year of 209, KRW 25,340,310,09, value-added tax for the second year of 209, KRW 290, value-added tax for the second year of 2010, KRW 51,675,100, and KRW 100 for the first year of 2011.