1. The Defendant imposed a transfer income tax of KRW 23,384,720 on the Plaintiff on April 1, 2013.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On May 17, 1997, the Plaintiff acquired 22 square meters of land B in Geumcheon-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant old house”) and acquired C apartment 520 Dong 1903 (hereinafter “instant newly-built house”) through the redevelopment association on September 26, 2002.

B. On September 20, 2007, the Plaintiff transferred the newly-built house of this case, and calculated on November 30, 2007, pursuant to Article 99-3(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 9272, Dec. 26, 2008; hereinafter the same), and reported capital gains tax as zero won by calculating the calculated capital gains tax to 32,848,700 won.

C. The Defendant, on April 1, 2013, deemed that the transfer income amount before the date of acquisition of the newly-built house of this case does not fall under the tax reduction or exemption under the above Acts, and imposed and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 23,384,720 (including additional tax that was paid in bad faith, KRW 8,092,596) by calculating the tax reduction or exemption as KRW 13,73,541 in the way of converting the total transfer income by using the standard market price, as follows, pursuant to Article 40(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21307, Feb. 4, 2009; hereinafter the same shall apply).

(A) Income amount subject to abatement or exemption (hereinafter “disposition in this case”) 】 transfer income amount 】 (Standard market price at the time of the transfer of the newly-built house - standard market price at the time of the acquisition of the newly-built house) / (Standard market price at the time of the transfer of the newly-built house - Standard market price at the time of the acquisition of the newly-built house) 】 calculated tax amount subject to abatement

D. The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, but was dismissed on March 24, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] The Evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 1 of Eul

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion (1) is sought.