The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The phrase "the date on which construction is possible after the actual completion of a unit of partition" under Article 142 (1) 1-6 (c) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (amended by December 31, 1986) means the time when construction is completed even before a disposition of replotting is publicly announced in the case of a land readjustment project, and at least the time the construction of the building is completed, in addition to the completion of the suspension work for the land in the rearrangement project district, at least the time the construction of the building is completed to the extent that it is good for legal enforcement (see Supreme Court Decision 85Nu9 delivered on August 20, 1985; Supreme Court Decision 86Nu209 delivered on January 20, 1987).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below, after compiling the adopted evidence, recognized the land of this case and its neighboring roads and land status located within the 387 Section 2, Dong-dong, as stated in its reasoning. In order to use the land of this case such as constructing a building, it is necessary to establish a branch road with a width of 12 meters adjacent to the land of this case and install drainage facilities on the road of this case. The above road was started on March 10, 1981 and completed on December 28, 1982. Thus, according to the adopted evidence, the land of this case can be seen as having been constructed after the land readjustment project was completed on December 28, 1982 after completion of the above road facilities and drainage facilities. Accordingly, the land of this case does not fall under the category of Article 142 (1) 16 (c) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act before the lapse of 2 years from the same date.

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just in accordance with the legal principles as seen earlier, and there is no error of misconception of facts, incomplete deliberation, or misunderstanding of legal principles.

In this paper, the judgment of the court below is criticized on the premise that construction of the building in this case is legally enforced only on the condition that the land on which the building in the missionary center is newly constructed is consistent with the land in this case and its situation, or the drainage facilities are completed on the park in the field. However, it cannot be accepted as it goes against the facts duly established by the court below.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yellow-ray (Presiding Justice)