The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and the purport of the appeal are the judgment of the first instance.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the part from 8.5 to 10.16 of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part as set forth in the following paragraph (2). Thus, the part as used on February 2, 199 is quoted (including summary language) by Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (including summary language). Na) The Plaintiff sold real estate to a third party without completion of the registration of real name after the lapse of the grace period under the law of the real estate real name (i.e., the testimony by the witness M of the first instance trial). According to the testimony by the witness M of the court of first instance, in the case of the real estate of this case that is

the Corporation.

In light of the above, the Plaintiff was fully responsible for the collection, registration tax, property tax, transfer income tax, etc. imposed on each of the instant real estate from the time the Plaintiff acquired each of the instant real estate in the name of the deceased B to the time of disposal of the instant real estate or real name registration, or the total amount of tax imposed when each of the instant real estate was owned by the Plaintiff solely, and the circumstances cited by the Plaintiff, including that there was no change in the amount of tax imposed, were insufficient to evade taxes or avoid restrictions under the law

It is insufficient to accept the registration, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it (in fact, the plaintiff did not register the real name in order to sell each real estate of this case without the real name registration even without the real name registration.

In light of the recognition, there was a purpose to avoid the burden of acquisition tax and registration tax to be borne when real names are registered by the Plaintiff.

(A) Even if there was no intention to avoid tax evasion or statutory restrictions, the penalty surcharge should not be reduced. The Defendant confirmed the Plaintiff’s trust in the Plaintiff’s name, and then “tax” to the Plaintiff.