조경업자에게 임대한 토지의 8년자경농지에 해당함[각하]
Gwangju High Court 2013Nu894 ( November 14, 2013)
early 2012 Mine2524 (No. 22, 2012)
the land leased to the landscaping business operator shall fall under the category of the farmland owned by the landscaping business operator for 8 years.
When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du18202, Dec. 13, 2012).
The reduction or exemption of transfer income tax for self-Cultivating farmland under Article 69 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, Article 66 of the Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act
Revocation of disposition imposing capital gains tax
OO
Head of Maritime Tax Office
Gwangju High Court Decision 2013Nu894 Decided November 14, 2013
2014.03.27
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.
Judgment ex officio is made.
When an administrative disposition is revoked, such disposition shall lose its validity and no longer exists, and a revocation lawsuit against a non-existent administrative disposition is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Du18202, Dec. 13, 2012).
According to the records, the defendant could know the fact that he revoked the disposition of this case ex officio on March 4, 2014, which was after filing the appeal of this case. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is already extinguished and seeks revocation of the disposition that does not exist, and thus, the lawsuit of this case was unlawful as
Therefore, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed, and since this case is sufficient for the court to directly judge, the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed, and the defendant shall be borne by the defendant pursuant to Article 32 of the Administrative Litigation Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices