1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons why this part of the disposition is stated by the court are as follows. This part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal or addition of a part of the judgment of the court of first instance (Articles 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In Part 2, "17,706/18,329" was added to "17,706/18,329" (However, the aggregate of the shares of the site by each unit of apartment house or apartment house owner of the case where the plaintiff was established is 17,703/18,329)" and "the site by the 15-16 shop" (hereinafter referred to as "the site by the 15-16 commercial building site" is added to "the site by the 17,703/18,329" (hereinafter referred to as "the site by the case").

The "Local Education Tax 36,564,970 won" will be added to the "Local Education Tax 36,564,970 won."

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The purport of the Plaintiff’s assertion and the grounds for this part of the pertinent provision are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance (Articles 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act), except for the dismissal or addition of part of the judgment of the first instance as follows. Thus, this part of the judgment of the first instance is cited as it is in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Pursuant to the following, the first 1-3 conduct is changed:

The Defendant identified the entire site of the instant apartment building as taxable subject to acquisition tax at the time of the instant disposition, but, among the apartment building site of this case, the shares already owned by the Plaintiff were paid acquisition tax corresponding thereto at the time of acquisition of such shares, and the shares transferred to the Plaintiff through division of the above jointly owned property are 626/18,329 shares, and the shares transferred to the Plaintiff through division of the above jointly owned property is also 626/18,329 shares in the register, and thus, the apartment building site of this case is also