1. The penalty tax of the gift tax of December 31, 2004, which was paid by the Defendant to A on December 7, 2012, was KRW 5,542,340, and March 15, 2005.

(a) 296,297 Won 95,032,592* 109,75,756,297 of the gift tax of March 15, 2005 plus KRW 6,460,000 of the gift tax of March 15, 2005 were deducted, and became KRW 103,296,297;

E. A filed an appeal on April 2, 2012, but was dismissed by the Tax Tribunal on June 29, 2012.

F. On October 8, 2012, the Defendant corrected the gift tax (including additional tax) by reducing or correcting the gift tax (including additional tax) as described in the following Table 3:

(1) The gift tax shall be levied on December 31, 2004 ( February 6, 2005) from the date two months have elapsed before the base date of appraisal before the date of the termination of rights, which is the average of the last market values of the Korea Exchange from the date following the date following the date of the termination of rights ( February 8, 2005) March 15, 2005 to the date following the date of the termination of rights ( February 8, 2005), which is 26 won, 761, 620 won, 88, 100, 690 won, i.e., the average of the last market values of the Korea Exchange from the date following the date of the termination of rights ( February 8, 2005) to the date on which two months have passed after the base date of appraisal.

G. On December 7, 2012, the Defendant revoked ex officio the imposition of additional gift tax on each gift tax, and notified A of the imposition of additional gift tax on the same amount.

(hereinafter “instant penalty tax”). The notice of imposition and collection of the instant penalty tax was served on December 16, 2012.

H. A died on December 4, 2012 in the instant lawsuit.

The Plaintiffs filed a death report on December 18, 2012, and succeeded to the instant lawsuit on April 16, 2013.

[Ground of Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5, 11, 12, 13, 17, 20 evidence, Eul evidence 1 through 4, 11, 12, and 13 (including additional numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the gift tax of this case is lawful

A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion (1) In regards to the purpose of tax avoidance, G participates in capital increase increase for the H’s rehabilitation. However, if the listed corporation’s shares are owned in a large amount of more than 5/100, the content of the changes in shares.