beta
Text
1. On August 26, 2016, the Defendant imposed an overconcentration charge of KRW 18,959,59,360 against the Plaintiff on August 26, 2016.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The Plaintiff is a corporation that is engaged in a construction project, building maintenance project, etc. for the consignment of real estate and the entrusted real estate development project, and MSP NewBB (hereinafter “MS NewB”) is a corporation that is engaged in construction business (in earth and sand, construction projects, housing projects, water supply and drainage, steel bars, concrete packaging), building housing, and housing lots.
B. Around 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a land trust agreement (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”) with MS NewB with the purport that the Plaintiff constructed a building of 5 underground floors and 17 floors above the ground on the ground of 643-1 door-gu, Songpa-gu, Seoul, Songpa-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant land”). On August 22, 2016, the Plaintiff newly constructed a building with the total floor area of 158,198.59 square meters above the 5th underground floor and its use as a sales facility for the business facility (hereinafter “instant building”). Upon filing an application for approval for use with the head of Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, the Plaintiff obtained approval for the use of the instant building on September 1, 2016.
C. On August 26, 2016, the Defendant imposed an overconcentration charge of KRW 19,539,405,160 on the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 12 of the Seoul Metropolitan Area Readjustment Planning Act, etc.
(hereinafter referred to as the "disposition in this case", and the above overconcentration charge "the overconcentration charge in this case"). / [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 2, and 11, and Eul No. 1 (including the number of each branch number), and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The instant disposition was unlawful in the course of procedural violation as follows; thus, the instant disposition is unlawful. (A) According to the proviso of Article 3 subparag. 4 of the Enforcement Decree of the Seoul Metropolitan Area Readjustment Planning Act, Article 2 of the Act on Special Measures for the Promotion of Venture Businesses, which is omitted