1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. On October 24, 2007, C concluded a real estate sales contract with the real estate developer, including the Defendant, to transfer D and 16 parcels (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the real estate developer including the Defendant at the time of the economic globalization, and agreed upon the buyer to bear all taxes under a special agreement.

C around April 2013, the ownership of the instant real estate was transferred to the Defendant, etc.

B. Around 2013, the Plaintiff operating an accounting office entered into a contract with C on the vindication of notification of taxation of capital gains tax on the instant real estate and on the delegation of business affairs (e.g., filing of an objection, request for examination, or adjudgment) (hereinafter “instant delegation contract”). The remuneration is set at 30% of the tax amount revoked or reduced based on the amount of notified tax originally notified (excluding value-added tax), and the Defendant guaranteed C’s obligation to pay remuneration to the Plaintiff.

C. On January 2, 2014, the director of the tax office issued a tax notice of KRW 220,40,405,420 in the aggregate of capital gains tax of KRW 200,368,570 (including additional dues as of February 28, 2014, which is the due date for payment) and local income tax of KRW 20,036,850 (including additional dues as of February 28, 2014, which is the due date for payment) for KRW 220,405,420.

With respect to the tax authority, the Plaintiff asserted exemption from capital gains tax on the instant real estate based on the fact that C has self-refined the instant real estate for not less than eight years.

E. On March 18, 2014, the director of the tax office issued a tax notice of KRW 2,274,60,000, in total, for C of the transfer income tax on the remaining land except for E land in the event of Gyeonggi E, among the instant real estate, on March 18, 2014, with respect to C of KRW 2,067,820, and local income tax on KRW 206,780.

F. On the ground that C violated the duty to report real estate transactions pursuant to the duty payment notice of this case, C was subject to an administrative fine of KRW 16,761,740, and the Defendant was subject to an administrative fine of KRW 17,138,620.

G. C: (a) December 13, 2013; (b) KRW 1,00,000,000, to the Plaintiff.