beta
(영문) 대법원 1998. 9. 22. 선고 98두9271 판결

[증여세부과처분취소][공1998.11.1.(69),2625]

Main Issues

Article 67-7 (1) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, the requirements of "self-employed farmer"

Summary of Judgment

In order to be exempted from the gift tax pursuant to the provisions of Article 67-7 of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4451 of Dec. 27, 1991), the "self-employed farmer" should be deemed to be a donation of farmland. The "self-employed farmer" in this context means a person who falls under any subparagraph of Article 55-5 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13545 of Dec. 31, 191), which prescribes the scope of the delegation of Article 67-6 (1) of the same Act, and who resides in a Si, Eup, or Myeon located in the same or adjacent area as farmland, grassland, or forest area, and who continues to engage in farming for more than 18 years retroactively from the date of acquisition, and even if he engages in farming for more than 2 years retroactively from the date of acquisition, it refers to a self-employed farmer, even if he is a self-employed farmer, and even if he is engaged in other occupation.

[Reference Provisions]

Articles 67-6(1) and 67-7(1) of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (Amended by Act No. 4451, Dec. 27, 1991); Article 55-5(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (Amended by Presidential Decree No. 13545, Dec. 31, 1991; see current Article 57(1))

Reference Cases

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Doz., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff, Appellant

Plaintiff (Attorney Park Chang-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant, Appellee

Kimpo-hoon

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 97Gu15083 delivered on April 30, 1998

Text

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The Second Ground of Appeal

In other words, in order to be exempted from the gift tax pursuant to the donation of farmland pursuant to the provisions of Article 67-7 of the former Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act (amended by Act No. 4451 of Dec. 27, 1991), the "self-employed farmer" should be deemed to be a donation of farmland. The "self-employed farmer" here means a person who falls under each subparagraph of Article 55-5 (1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption (amended by Presidential Decree No. 13545 of Dec. 31, 1991) that prescribes the scope of the donation pursuant to the delegation of Article 67-6 (1) of the same Act (see Supreme Court Decision 96Nu8574 of Oct. 11, 196). In other words, if a person who resides in a Si, Eup, or Myeon, identical or adjacent to farmland, and who is engaged in farming continuously for two years or more retroactively from the date of acquisition, and if such person is not a self-employed farmer, it is justified in the position.

The First Ground for Appeal

According to the records, we affirm the decision of the court below that the plaintiff did not have been engaged in farming before receiving the donation of the farmland of this case and did not directly engage in farming in the farmland of this case, and used it for other purposes or neglected it, and there is no error of misconception of facts due to a violation of the rules of evidence, such as theory of lawsuit, etc.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-soo (Presiding Justice)