beta
Text
1. All parts of the instant lawsuit’s preliminary claims are dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's primary claim is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. The plaintiff married with B on September 12, 1984, but divorced after the decision of recommending reconciliation was confirmed on December 8, 2002 from the divorce lawsuit (U.S. District Court 2002ddan2523) filed by B against the plaintiff.
B. Although the Plaintiff and B maintained a de facto marital relationship even after the divorce, on October 22, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming consolation money and a division of property against B (U.S. District Court Branch Decision 2011ddan17527), and rendered a judgment that “B shall pay the Plaintiff property division of KRW 282,00,000 (hereinafter omitted)” (hereinafter “instant property division judgment”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on November 19, 2013.
C. On November 17, 2013, the Plaintiff and B drafted a document stating “Agreement on Property Division” (hereinafter “instant agreement”) separate from the instant judgment on property division. The instant agreement contains the content that “B, a title holder on the registry of “B”, who is the ownership of the instant real estate, shall transfer to the Plaintiff the ownership of the instant real estate, in addition to the instant land and factory buildings, building of 329 square meters and its ground buildings, D previous 2,143 square meters, E forest and fields, 1,631 square meters, and 3,234 square meters before F. (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
The Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant real estate in accordance with the instant agreement, and on December 24, 2013, on the basis of the statutory standard price of the instant real estate of KRW 2,98,283,640 as the tax base, the Plaintiff reported and paid acquisition tax by applying 104,589,920, local education tax, KRW 8,964,850, and KRW 576,560 (hereinafter “instant acquisition tax, etc.”) calculated by applying 3.5% as stipulated in Article 11(1)2 of the former Local Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 13427, Jul. 24, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply) to the Defendant.
E. The Plaintiff filed an objection to the instant acquisition tax, etc. with the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do on March 14, 2014, but the return and payment of local taxes are subject to the objection.