2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. Plaintiff Kim Jong-○ is the spouse of the decedent’s Dol (hereinafter referred to as “the decedent”) and the rest of the Plaintiffs are the children of the decedent. As the decedent died on June 28, 2015, Plaintiff Kim Jong-○ solely inherited the total of 11,719 square meters of the 4 pieces of land located in Gyeyang-dong, Gyeyang-gu, Incheon, and the total of 5,039 square meters of the 5,039 square meters of the 3 lots of land located in Bupyeong-gu, Incheon (hereinafter referred to as “the instant land”). The rest of the Plaintiffs jointly inherited the ○○ ○-2 factory site in Jeju-do and 788.3 square meters of the 2,171 square meters of the land (hereinafter referred to as “the instant factory”). The Plaintiffs succeeded to other real estate and financial property of the decedent.

B. On December 28, 2015, the Plaintiffs considered the instant land as a farming property inherited, and completed the inheritance tax return, setting the tax base amount at the amount obtained by subtracting KRW 500 million, which is the limit of deduction for farming inheritance, from the market value of the instant land from the taxable value of inherited property.

C. On October 5, 2016, the director of the △△ Regional Tax Office denied the deduction of farming inheritance on the ground that there is no objective evidence proving that the Plaintiff Kim○○ had cultivated the instant land for two consecutive years prior to the date on which the inheritance commences, and notified the Plaintiff of the inclusion of KRW 10,164,70 of the appraised value in the inheritance value. On October 5, 2016, the Defendant issued a disposition to correct the inheritance tax amount as KRW 1,404,291,337 (including additional tax on negligent tax returns of KRW 22,235,97 and additional tax of KRW 24,442,437 and additional tax of KRW 24,571,030.

D. On October 18, 2016, the Plaintiffs dissatisfied with the above disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal. On June 27, 2017, the Tax Tribunal, on the grounds that the Plaintiffs cannot be deemed to have omitted the size of the factory of this case, determined the tax base and tax amount calculated by subtracting the appraised value of KRW 10,164,70 from the appraised value of inherited property corrected, but on the ground that it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff Kim ○○ had cultivated the instant land for two consecutive years before the commencement date of the inheritance. Accordingly, on December 8, 2017, the Defendant rendered a decision to dismiss the remaining appeal on the ground that: (a) the amount of inheritance tax was reduced to KRW 1,398,76,943 (including additional tax 21,848,588 won and additional tax 24,397,802 won; and (b) the purport of imposing the deducted tax amount of KRW 343,643 won from the appraised value of the instant factory of this case; and (c).

2. Determination

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Plaintiff ○○○ had a rice shed in the instant land since around 2003 along with the decedent, and thus, the requirements for the deduction of succession to farming have been met. However, the instant disposition denying the deduction of succession to farming without recognizing it should be revoked as unlawful.

(b) Related statutes;

It is as shown in the attached Form.

(c) Fact of recognition;

1) From August 11, 1990 to 201, the decedent operated a feed wholesale and retail business from around 11, 1990 to December 27, 201. From around 2002 to 2006, the decedent engaged in a housing construction and sales business from around 2001 to 2006. From around 201 to 2015, the decedent engaged in a real estate rental business at Incheon or Kimpo-si, and the decedent reported a total of KRW 97,382,367, and the total of KRW 104,734,876, and KRW 18,069,344 for year 2015, respectively.

2) 원고 김○○는 2001. 1. 8. 이후 인천 계양구 ▦▦동에서 '▦▦몰 113호'라는 상호로 부동산 임대업을, 2012. 1. 1.부터 2015. 7. 1.까지는 피상속인이 운영하던 ○○사료와 동일한 장소에서 동일 상호로 사료 도・소매업을 각 영위하였다. 위 원고는 2013년 2,891,759원을, 2014년 2,608,827원을, 2015년 16,191,339원을, 2016년 17,805,701원을 소득금액으로 각 신고하였다.

3) 농지원부상 피상속인이 농업인으로, 원고 김○○가 업무집행사원으로 등재되어 있다가 2015. 8. 18. 원고 김○○가 피상속인을 승계하여 농업인으로 등재되었고,피상속인이 2016. 1. 20. ▦▦농업협동조합에서 탈퇴됨에 따라 원고 김○○가 2016. 1. 20. 위 조합의 조합원으로 가입하였으며, 2009. 4. 22.부터 2015. 12. 30.까지 피상속인이 농업경영체의 경영주로 등록되어 있다가 2016. 3. 24. 원고 김○○가 농업경영체의 경영주로 등록되었다.

4) 피상속인은 농업기계인 관리기, 병충해 방제기, 농업용 트랙터 등을 보유하고 있으면서 2006. 5. 4.부터 2015. 6. 17.까지 ▦▦농협에서 86건 합계 1,472만 원 상당의 비료, 농약, 유류, 시설원예자재 등을 매입하였고, ▦▦농협은 피상속인으로부터 2006. 10. 17.부터 2014. 12. 15.까지 2007년을 제외하고 연 평균 2,608kg의 쌀을 매입하였다. 원고 김○○는 2016. 5. 16. 처음 ▦▦농협에서 비료와 농약을 매입하였고, 2016년 수확한 쌀을 ▦▦농협에 매도하였다. ▦▦농협이 2013년부터 2017년까지 피상속인 또는 원고 김○○로부터 벼를 수매한 비율은 이 사건 토지의 매년 총 생산량인 약 10,000kg의 24~34% 정도였다.

5) On August 30, 2016, Plaintiff Kim ○○ submitted a written confirmation stating that he/she has falsely reported farming inheritance deduction without purchasing pesticides, fertilizers, and rice at the beginning of the first time to the Defendant on August 30, 2016, and then failed to submit any data regarding the Defendant’s self-defense during the investigation period.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements, Gap's 1 through 12, 20, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, Eul's 1 through 17 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

D. Determination

1) Article 18(2) of the former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Act No. 13557, Dec. 15, 2015; hereinafter the same) provides that the value of the property inherited shall be deducted from the taxable value of inherited property within the limit of 500 million won in the case of farming inheritance. Article 18(4) of the same Act provides that when applying the farming inheritance deduction, the requirements, etc. of decedents and inheritors are delegated by Presidential Decree. Accordingly, Article 16(2) and (3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26922, Jan. 22, 2016; hereinafter the same) provides that in order to apply the farming inheritance under Article 18(2)2 of the same Act, the decedents and the heirs must engage in farming continuously before two years prior to the date of commencing the inheritance.

The purpose of the farming inheritance mutual aid is to support the economic activities of farmers by granting benefits from additional deduction compared to the general public on the premise that farming is continued (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Du844, Oct. 11, 2002). Therefore, the heir who asserts that the decedent and the farming heir have been engaged in direct farming continuously for two years prior to the commencement date of the inheritance should actively prove that they had been engaged in the farming business, and in determining whether they have been directly engaged in farming, the standard is whether they have been managed and cultivated under their own responsibility without entrusting or lending it to another person (see Supreme Court Decision 88Nu1240, Dec. 12, 1989).

2) Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the foregoing facts and the evidence revealed as to the instant case, it is insufficient to deem that Plaintiff Kim ○○ was directly engaged in farming with the decedent two years prior to the commencement of the inheritance. Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the requirements for the deduction in farming inheritance have been satisfied. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs’ assertion is without merit.

A) The Plaintiff Kim ○, a group of rice produced on the land in this case, stored the remainder (7,00 kg a year) except for the purchase price and the use price for the compact, and sold only in cash to her relatives and her neighbors. The Plaintiff Kim ○, a group of her relatives and her neighbors asserted that he/she carried 3-15 Gan (1 Gan) and 15 Gan (80 cm a large volume of rice). However, it is difficult for the general public to obtain payment in light of the ordinary common sense that the general public paid the purchase price only by carrying a large volume of rice without the help of the delivery company. In addition, the Plaintiffs did not submit any data on the details of selling and receiving the rice as above, or the details of using the rice.

나) 원고 김○○가 농지원부상 농업인으로 등재된 날이나 농업경영체의 경영주로 등록된 날, ▦▦농업협동조합의 조합원으로 기재된 날은 모두 이 사건 상속개시일 이후로서 원고 김○○가 상속일 이전에 농산물을 생산하거나 판매하였다고 인정할 객관적인 증거가 없고, 피상속인과 원고 김○○는 부동산임대업, 사료도소매업 등을 영위하면서 피상속인이 사망하기 전인 2013년부터 2014년까지 그 소득으로 합계 약 2억 원을 신고하였다. 피상속인과 원고 김○○ 명의로 사업자등록이 이루어진 ○○사료가 운영된 기간이 1990년경부터 2015년경까지 약 25년에 이르고, 임대업 등을 포함하여 얻은 소득이 장기간에 걸쳐 상당한 금액에 달하는 점을 고려할 때, 피상속인과 원고 김○○의 주된 수입원은 ○○사료의 운영 및 부동산임대에 의한 것이었을 것으로 보인다.

다) 이 사건 상속 개시일로부터 2년 전인 2013년경에는 원고 김○○와 피상속인의 자녀인 원고 박○□(1997년생), 박○▦(1999년생), 박○▨(2003년생)이 모두 미성년자로서 부모의 돌봄이 필요한 나이였던바, 2013~2014년경 연간 매출 금액이 약 4,000만 원에 달하는 ○○사료를 운영하면서(을 제14호증의 1, 2) 합계 16,758㎡에 이르는 이 사건 토지를 피상속인과 원고 김○○가 모두 경작하였다고 보는 것은 무리이다.

D) Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions, including evidence Nos. 6 ( farmland ledger), 7 (Certificate of Registration of Agricultural Business Entities), 8 (Written Confirmation of Registration of Agricultural Business Entities), 9 (Examination of Purchase Details), 11 (Certificate of Withdrawal of Members), 21-1, 21-2 (Application for Self-Proof Issuance), etc., it may be recognized that decedents and Plaintiff Kim ○○ is farmland owners or agricultural cooperative members. However, it is insufficient to support that the decedents and Plaintiff Kim○ was a farmland owner or agricultural cooperative member without being leased to another person.

E) Even if there exists a record of purchasing agricultural chemicals and fertilizers from the agricultural cooperative and the records of purchasing rice from the agricultural cooperative, the Plaintiff Kim ○○ submitted a certificate of confirmation that “the Plaintiff Kim ○ filed a false report on the inheritance tax deduction without permission for agricultural products, fertilizers, and rice thunders” on August 30, 2016, and then did not submit any data during the period of investigation into the inherited property; it is sufficiently possible for the actual farmer to trade with the agricultural cooperative in the name of the landowner; and the cost of purchasing rice deposited by the Defendant’s passbook in around 2013 and 2014 was entirely collected into approximately one month (Evidence No. 26 of the above). In light of the above, it is difficult to view that the specification of transactions with the agricultural cooperative as above was evidence of self-defense immediately.

"바) 최▧▧ 등은 원고 김○○가 이 사건 토지에서 직접 영농에 종사하였다는 내용의 확인서를 작성하여 준 사실이 있으나(을 제6, 8호증), 그 내용에 비추어 부동문자로 미리 인쇄된 확인서에 서명만 한 것으로 보이고, 최▧▧ 등의 경우 을 제7호증의 기재에 의하면 최▧▧은 1995년경부터 2015년경까지 부동산임대업을, 박▩▩은 1992년경부터 2008년경까지 주점, 광고제작업, 부동산중개업 등을, 박▤▤는 2010년에서 2011년경까지 부동산임대업을, 박은 1994년경부터 2015년경까지 건설업, 부동산임대업 등을 영위해온 것으로 보이는바 원고 김○○의 영농 사실을 어떻게 알게 되었는지 그 경위가 불분명하며, 조사 과정에서 이 사건 토지를 실제 경작한 사람으로 지목되었던 임○○의 경우 최▧▧, 박▩▩, 박▤▤, 박의 확인서가 제출된 2016. 10. 17.경으로부터 6개월 정도 지난 2017. 3. 14.에서야 그 확인서가 제출되었고, 그 내용 역시 '임○○이 돈을 받고 피상속인이 보유한 트랙터로 논갈이를 하고, 지인의 이양기로 모내기를 하였으며, 콤바인으로 벼수확을 하였다'는 것인데, 이는 원고가 피고에게 제출한 항변서(을 제9호증)에서 주장한임○○은 트랙터 보유자로서 모내기만 해 주었다'라는 내용 및 원고들의 '임○○에게 돈과 벼를 지급하고 논갈이, 모내기, 벼 수확 등을 맡겼다'는 이 법원에서의 주장과도 일치한다고 보기 어려워 그 신빙성이 높지 않다.",3. 결론

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.

(1) The former Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (Amended by Act No. 13557, Dec. 15, 2015)

Article 18 (Basic Deductions)

(2) Where inheritance commences due to the death of a resident, in any of the following cases, the following amounts shall be deducted from the taxable value of inherited property:

2. Succession to farming [including farming, fishing, and forestry; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article]: The value of the inherited farming property (where the value exceeds 500 million won, it shall be limited to 500 million won);

(3) A successor to a family business or farming inheritance shall submit documents evidencing that the successor falls under the inheritance to a family business or farming inheritance to the head of the district tax office having jurisdiction over the place of tax payment pursuant to

(4) In applying paragraph (2), the scope of inheritance of a family business and farming inheritance, such as the requirements of the ancestor and the heir, the method of application in cases where shares, etc. are inherited, and other necessary matters shall be prescribed by

(1) The former Enforcement Decree of the Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26922, Jan. 22, 2016)

(2)

(1) Farming business under Article 18 (2) 2 of the Act means engaging in agriculture, forestry, and fisheries under the Korean Standard Industrial Classification as the main business.

(2) A succession to farming under Article 18 (2) 2 of the Act (hereinafter referred to as "Succession to farming") shall apply only where an ancestor satisfies the requirements classified as follows: Provided, That the foregoing shall not apply where an ancestor falls under subparagraph 2 and inheritance commences due to death of the largest shareholder, etc. (excluding an heir inherited to farming) at the time of inheritance to farming after inheritance to farming:

1. Agriculture to which the Income Tax Act applies: Where all of the following requirements are satisfied:

(a) To be engaged directly in farming for two years before the commencement date of the inheritance;

(b) A Si (including an administrative city under Article 10 (2) of the Special Act on the Establishment of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province and the Development of Free International City; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article)/Gun/Gu (referring to an autonomous Gu; hereafter the same shall apply in this Article) in which farmland, grassland and forest land (hereafter referred to as "farmland, etc." in this Article) are located, a Si/Gun/Gu adjacent thereto, or a Si/Gun/Gu within 30 kilometers in a straight line (in cases of a forest land, including an area ordinarily able to be managed), or a Gun/Gu in a straight line (in cases of a forest land, including an area normally able to be managed) adjacent thereto, or a Si/Gun/Gu in a

(3) A farming inheritance shall apply where the heir is at least 18 years of age as of the commencement date of inheritance and meets the following requirements, or is a successor to farming, fishing, or forestry prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy

1. Agriculture to which the Income Tax Act applies: Where all of the following requirements are satisfied:

(a) To be engaged directly in farming for two years before the commencement date of the inheritance;

(b) Residence in the area prescribed in paragraph (2) 1 (b).

(4) Where an ancestor or heir directly engages in farming under paragraphs (2) 1 (a) and (3) 1 (a), respectively, means any of the following cases: Provided, That where the taxable period in which the sum of the business income under Article 19 (2) of the Income Tax Act (excluding income accruing from agriculture, forestry and fisheries, income accruing from real estate rental business under Article 45 (2) of the Income Tax Act, and side business income of a farm household under Article 9 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and where such business income is negative, it shall be deemed zero) and the total amount of gross income under Article 20 (2) of the same Act is at least 37 million won, the decedent or heir shall be deemed not to be engaged in farming in the relevant taxable period:

1. Where a person engages in the cultivation of crops or the growing of perennial plants by using assets, such as farmland, etc. owned, or carries out at least half of farming works with his/her own labor;

(8) A person who intends to obtain a deduction in succession to farming shall submit a detailed statement of farming property and documents evidencing the inheritance prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Strategy and Finance to the head of the tax office having jurisdiction over