A. On June 19, 2008, the Plaintiff acquired and owned a total of 3,200 square meters of land, including 982 square meters, C 2,102 square meters, and D 116 square meters of land (hereinafter “pre-division land”) in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and transferred part of land to Nonparty E and F on September 13, 2013.

B. A part of the land that the Plaintiff transferred to E, etc. is the area of 1,995 square meters and 593 square meters prior to H in Suwon-si G, Suwon-si (hereinafter “instant land”). This is part of the land prior to the subdivision, which is the part of the land in Suwon-si and the land in Suwon-si C and the land in B, which are combined and divided under the following table.

B: (a) Acceptance on June 10, 2010, in the instant land, of KRW 1,95 square meters prior to the subdivision on March 19, 2013; and (b) on March 201, 2013, divided on April 01, 2013; and (c) C 2,102 square meters prior to the transfer on September 13, 2013, and of KRW 3,102 square meters prior to the transfer on September 2013, 2013; and (c) on June 10, 2010, in the instant land, of KRW 1,582 square meters prior to G 2,582 square meters prior to the transfer to I; and (d) KRW 527,700,000 square meters prior to the instant land, KRW 593 square meters prior to the transfer on April 13, 2013

C. As of November 30, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for reduction or exemption of substitute farmland upon filing a report on capital gains tax on the instant land as of November 30, 2013. However, the Defendant denied the reduction or exemption of substitute farmland on the ground that the instant land cannot be deemed farmland at the time of transfer and cannot be deemed to have been self-fluenced by the Plaintiff, as a result of on-site verification against the Plaintiff from October 16, 2014 to October 24, 2014, and on January 5, 2015, the Plaintiff corrected and notified the Plaintiff of KRW 119,853,700 (including additional tax) for capital gains tax

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

The Plaintiff filed an objection and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on August 10, 2015, but was dismissed on November 11, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, Gap 1, 2, 56 through 58, Eul 1, 2, 5 and 9, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is clear that the Plaintiff was farmland cultivated as dry field at the time of concluding a sales contract with Nonparty E and F. However, the Plaintiff purchased the land for the purpose of using it as a construction material exhibition.