2. The plaintiff shall bear the litigation costs.

가. 원고는 1989. 12. 30. 취득한 용인시 처인구 OO동 567의1 전 1，274㎡， 같은 동 567의5 전 8㎡(이하 '이 사건 농지')를 2011. 2. 9. 용인지방공사에 양도하였다.

B. On April 30, 201, the Plaintiff filed a return of reduction or exemption of capital gains tax on the ground that he/she resided in the instant farmland for at least eight years, and the Defendant, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not reside in the seat of the farmland and did not meet the requirements for direct cultivation, as stated in the purport of the claim on January 9, 2012.

2. Determination

(a) In order to have the capital gains tax reduced or exempted for not less than eight years, it shall reside at the seat of farmland for not less than eight years and work full-time for cultivating crops or for not less than one half of farming work for cultivating crops (Article 69 (1) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, Article 66 (1), and Article 66 (1) and (13) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act)

B. The plaintiff's assertion

(1) From April 26, 1995 to May 20, 201, about six years: one of three commercial buildings in the building located in Gi-si, Suwon-si, 000-8, is leased and operated by a room for the sale of euds and pressings, and a room was created and residing in that place.

(2) From May 21, 2001 to February 9, 2011, around nine years and seven months: A room among the buildings located in the 000-5 of the O200 U.S. U.S. at Chicago-si, one column was leased from KimB to five million won deposit.

(3) From April 1990 to the end of April 2010, it was regularly engaged in cultivating crops (cathos, bean, etc.).

C. Determination

(1) From May 7, 198, the Plaintiff’s family member (the wife, and three children) resided in the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 00-1 PP apartment No. 000,000, and June 26, 199 as from June 26, 199, the same as the Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 00-1 PP apartment No. 000,000, H apartment No. 0000. There is no special circumstance that the Plaintiff’s family member should have lived separately with the Plaintiff’s family member in light of the moving distance between the Seocho-dong and Seocho-gu, Seoul, Seoul, which is the family’s residence. While the Plaintiff’s wife was operated in the place of OOri domicile, the Plaintiff’s wife was married, but after the completion of the business, it is difficult to readily obtain the Plaintiff’s residence by leasing at least nine years after renting the deposit No. 5 million won from the Kim 24, 2001.

(2) The Plaintiff is equipped with the following: (a) while residing in a room leased from Pungcheon or KimB and engaging in the cultivation of crops at all times or input at least 1/2 of its own labor force; (b) engaged in farming operations; and (c) engaged in agricultural activities at all times; and (d) engaged in agricultural activities without any necessary farming equipment and does not seem to have been engaged in farming activities (Witness PoCC and KimB).

(3) From 205 to 2010, 2005, 14, and 16 were cultivated in the farmland of this case and the Plaintiff was involved in the farmland of this case for a period of six years from 2005 to 2010, and it is insufficient to deem that the Plaintiff was engaged in cultivating the farmland of this case, and the Plaintiff was involved in the farmland of this case, and that there was only a self-defense after August 26, 2002, which was the first date of production, and that it was not included in the self-defense after August 26, 2002, and that the Plaintiff was included in the calculation of Gap 21 to 27, and the above (1) (2).

3. Conclusion

The claim of this case is dismissed because it is difficult to accept the plaintiff's argument.