A. On January 30, 2002, the Plaintiff acquired 695 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “one piece of land”) prior to Gyeonggi-gun B on the ground that the Plaintiff was self-employed farmland for at least eight (8) years from June 15, 201, and applied for reduction or exemption of capital gains tax (25,898,310 won) by applying the provision on reduction or exemption of capital gains tax for self-employed farmland under Article 69 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act on the ground that the Plaintiff was self-employed farmland for at least eight (8) years from June 30, 201, and on February 6, 2002, applied for reduction or exemption of capital gains tax for KRW 32 square meters prior to Gyeonggi-gun C, which was awarded a successful bid in the process of voluntary auction (hereinafter referred to as “second-party land”) on September 15, 201, and applied for reduction or exemption of capital gains tax for at least 2011 won for farmland for at least six (10, October 6, 2018, 2011.

B. After checking the site on May 4, 2012 by the head of the Namyang District Tax Office at the time of the competent agency, the Plaintiff paid a revised return on July 31, 2012 at the rate of the reduced or exempted area for both land on the basis of 50%, but the head of the Namyang District Tax Office denied the reduction or exemption for the entire land area on September 5, 2012 and notified the revision of the capital gains tax.

C. After having changed the jurisdiction of the Defendant on April 1, 2014 by Gyeonggi-do, the Defendant, on the ground that the second land was not farmland at the time of the instant sale, on April 28, 2017, issued a decision to revise the Plaintiff’s capital gains tax of KRW 120,861,381 (including additional tax, and KRW 52,390,326) for the year 201 (hereinafter “instant disposition”), and served a tax notice on May 12, 2017.

On August 2, 2017, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on the instant disposition, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on December 6, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Eul's evidence Nos. 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Defendant, as unlawful in the Plaintiff’s assertion 1, served the Plaintiff with the instant disposition and served the payment notice by public notice. The above service by public notice is stipulated in Article 11(1)3 of the Framework Act on National Taxes.