1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff registered as a rental business operator on December 15, 2005, and completed the rental business after completing the construction of 450-4 Doldong-dong Maldong (hereinafter “instant rental housing”).

B. On September 26, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Bochidi Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Bochidi”) on the condition that it transfers the status of a rental business entity and the ownership of the instant rental housing.

C. On September 29, 2014, the Plaintiff reported to the head of the annual Gu of Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “the head of the annual Gu”) pursuant to Article 6(2) of the former Rental Housing Act, Article 8(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 3(4) of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act. The head of the annual Gu revoked the Plaintiff’s registration of the rental business operator on October 2, 2014.

On July 30, 2015, the Plaintiff transferred the ownership of the instant rental housing to Bochidi.

E. On June 1, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff owned the instant rental housing without being registered as a rental business operator, the head of the Haban Gun imposed KRW 9,854,900 on July 23, 2015 on the ground that the Plaintiff owned the instant rental housing without being registered as a rental business operator.

F. Accordingly, on May 9, 2016, the Defendant deemed that the instant rental house does not constitute a rental house excluding aggregate under the Comprehensive Real Estate Holding Tax Act and the Enforcement Decree thereof, and imposed KRW 235,234,960 on the Plaintiff, which was subject to comprehensive real estate holding tax, and KRW 47,046,990 on the Plaintiff.

(g) On August 1, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an appeal on August 1, 2016, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on October 26, 2016.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap 2-6 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, and the fact-finding inquiry and reply to the head of the Busan Metropolitan City annual Gu in Busan Metropolitan City, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the business registration under the former Rental Housing Act is simple for the purpose of managing the rental business operator of the administrative agency.