1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

가. 원고는 부동산개발 및 공급업, 토목건축공사업, 주택 및 상가건설업 등을 영위하던 법인으로, 1997년부터 2004년까지 순차적으로 서울 강서구 등촌동 681-2 대 6,6 93.1㎡ 외 407필지의 토지 총 1,937,509㎡(이하 ‘이 사건 토지’라 한다)를 취득하여 보유하다가, 2009. 12. 30. 지주회사 전환을 함에 있어 주택건설사업과 해외사업 부문 등을 물적분할하여 주식회사 부영주택(이하 ‘부영주택’이라 한다)을 설립한 후, 이 사건 토지를 회사분할을 원인으로 부영주택에게 이전하였다.

B. On the basis of the acquisition date of the instant land, the Plaintiff transferred the instant land within five years from the acquisition date, which is the grace period for the use of business under the proviso of Article 49(1)1(a) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Corporate Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 22951, Jun. 3, 2011; hereinafter the same) (hereinafter “suspension period”), as real estate for business purposes, and filed a corporate tax return for the business year 2009, deeming the instant land as non-business real estate after five years have elapsed since the grace period was expired, and until the land was transferred to the

C. However, in the business audit of the Seoul Regional Tax Office, the Board of Audit and Inspection pointed out that the entire land of this case should be deemed non-business real estate for the entire period from the date of acquiring the land of this case until the date of transferring the land of this case to the date of transferring the land of this case due to physical division. The Seoul Regional Tax Office notified the Defendant of the taxation data that the Defendant should not be included in the calculation of interest related to the acquisition fund of this case during the grace period (five years from the acquisition date) in accordance with the above cadastral record, and the Defendant notified the transfer date of the land of this case, that is, the date of physical division, the Plaintiff