1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On December 26, 2003, the Plaintiff transferred the land of this case to the E and F (hereinafter “non-party buyers”) on December 26, 2003, the value of the land of this case transferred to the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s domicile at the time of February 24, 2004, the value of the land of this case was KRW 135,70,000,000, the acquisition value of the land of this case was KRW 127,70,000, the value of the land of this case was KRW 2,809,400, the necessary expenses was substituted with KRW 456.9 square meters in Ulsan-gun-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, which was acquired from B on August 25, 2003.

On February 2, 2009, Nonparty 1 transferred the instant land to G, and reported the transfer income tax to the head of the Geumcheon District Tax Office with the acquisition value of the instant land at KRW 300,000,000.

Accordingly, the head of the tax office notified the Defendant of the difference between the transfer value reported by the Plaintiff and the transfer value reported by the Nonparty buyer on the instant land.

On October 8, 2009, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the pre-announcement of taxation that the acquisition value of the instant land is KRW 127,700,000, and the transfer value is KRW 300,000,000, and the transfer value is KRW 102,363,000.

The Plaintiff asserted that the actual acquisition value of the instant land is KRW 150,00,000, and the actual transfer value is KRW 178,000,000 at the time of acquisition, and presented a sales contract and the data on bank payments to the Defendant at the time of acquisition. On April 1, 2014, the Defendant issued a revised and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 83,584,398 of the transfer income tax for 2003, with the acquisition value of the instant land as KRW 150,00,000, and the transfer value as KRW 300,000,000 (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an objection against the Defendant on June 30, 2014, but was dismissed on July 23, 2014. The Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on September 30, 2014, but was dismissed on December 31, 2014.

[Ground of Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence No. 3, Eul No. 1 and No. 1.