1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff’s father B died on December 29, 2015, and the Plaintiff inherited, among inherited property, the inherited property, a house of 965 square meters and its ground (328.5 square meters and total floor area) in Yongsan-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City.

(2) Article 11(1)1 (b) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 14475, Dec. 27, 2016; hereinafter the same) applies to the instant land and housing, the Plaintiff paid the acquisition tax of KRW 25,087,90; KRW 1,43,590; KRW 1,791,91,90; KRW 28,313,570,000, total of KRW 28,313,570,000, which is calculated by applying the general tax rate under Article 11(1)1 (b) of the same Act to the instant land and housing.

B. According to the building ledger, this case’s housing consists of two single houses, and one building consists of 45 square meters in storage of one story underground, 167.43 square meters in housing of one story ground, 89.07 square meters in multi-family housing of two stories above ground, and two buildings are a garage of 27.5 square meters in total floor area.

Meanwhile, considering the actual status of the instant housing, one building is connected with the first floor and the second floor are connected with the interior stairs, and there is only the entrance entrance of the first floor, and there is no separate entrance that can be used solely by the second floor.

C. After conducting a business trip to the instant house and investigating the current status, the Defendant re-calculated the amount of tax by applying the tax rate under Article 13(5) of the former Local Tax Act by deeming the said house as falling under the high-class house under Article 28(4)2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act. Accordingly, on November 15, 2016, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the payment of acquisition tax 81,127,420 and special rural development tax, 7,395,940 (including additional tax) by deducting the amount already paid to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant disposition”) d.

The Plaintiff filed an objection against the instant disposition, but the Gyeonggi-do Governor dismissed it on April 12, 2017, and the Plaintiff again filed a tax appeal, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed it on December 6, 2017.