2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

While the Plaintiff owned 395 square meters, 106-1 square meters, 106-3 square meters, 106-3 square meters, 297, and 900 square meters, the Defendant calculated the amount of Gap evidence No. 163 square meters and the amount of Gap evidence No. 165, 280, 195, and the amount of Gap evidence No. 163 square meters and the amount of Gap evidence No. 166, 280, 196, and 195, under the premise that the land was incorporated into the land development project district related to the ballot-counting project, which the Seoul Metropolitan Government implemented with authorization of February 18, 1982; on December 22, 1989; on 81-13, 208, 81-15, 208, 81-16, 280.7, 196, and 197, the land price of this case is within the same period.

2. The plaintiff asserts that since the land readjustment project was completed on December 22, 198, the disposition of the above land excess profit tax, etc. by the defendant on the premise that the above land received as substitute was excluded from idle land until two years pass thereafter, even if the above land was excluded from idle land, the disposition of the above land excess profit tax, etc. by the defendant on the premise that it constitutes idle land shall be revoked.

3. The provisions of Article 3 of tax-related Acts and subordinate statutes stipulate that the land excess profit tax shall be imposed on the owner of the land which is determined as of the end of the taxable period, and the operator shall not impose the land excess profit tax on the land for the period concerned, and the prohibition of use due to the provisions of Acts and subordinate statutes acquired the land, destruction of building, collapse of the land, and other inevitable reasons as prescribed by the Presidential Decree shall not be regarded as idle land, etc. for the period as prescribed by the Presidential Decree, and Article 23 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that the land shall not be regarded as the period from the date of completion of the construction work of the land to the date of completion of the construction work of the land concerned after the completion of the construction work of the land concerned, and the operator shall, if the construction work of the land in excess of the fixed period is, after the completion of the construction work of the land concerned, within the period as prescribed by the Urban Redevelopment Projects Act and other Acts and subordinate statutes as stipulated by the Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport to the date of the construction work completed.

However, in full view of the results of inquiry into the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor, the construction work of the land in this case, such as suspension of the land in this case, water supply and drainage facilities, construction of roads, etc. was completed on August 30, 1987 and notified to the head of Seocho-gu, the permission-granting authority for the use of the land in this case, but it was not notified to the interested parties by public inspection, public announcement or other means, and it can be acknowledged that the construction work completion was made public and publicly announced en bloc after

If so, the land of this case is deemed to be a idle land only after October 17, 1990, which was two years after October 17, 198, and the above disposition of this case was made on the premise that it was already a idle land on January 1, 1990, and there is no data to calculate the excess amount of land from October 17, 1990 to December 31 of the same year. Thus, the above disposition of this case should be revoked in its entirety.

4. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the defendant who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Ansan-tae (Presiding Judge)