1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 21, 2013, the Plaintiff sold 1,531 square meters (hereinafter “the previous farmland in this case”) to C, etc. in Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si, and purchased 661 square meters (hereinafter “the acquired farmland in this case”) in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-do on April 4, 2013 from E.

B. On April 18, 2013, the Plaintiff reported the transfer income tax on the previous farmland of this case, and asserted that the previous farmland of this case constitutes reduction or exemption of transfer income tax on the farmland of this case under Article 70 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 12251, Jan. 14, 2014; hereinafter the same) and applied for full exemption of KRW 48,182,992 of transfer income tax.

C. As a result of the investigation on the Plaintiff’s content of capital gains tax, the Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff did not reside at the seat of the acquisition farmland of this case, and resided in Ulsan-dong F1, 2108 (hereinafter “F apartment”), and for the said reason, denied the reduction or exemption of capital gains tax on farmland substitute land under Article 70 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act. On July 21, 2014, the Defendant issued a correction and notification to the Plaintiff on KRW 54,803,330 (including additional tax 6,620,343) of capital gains tax for the year 2013.

The Plaintiff appealed and filed a tax appeal on February 9, 2015 after filing an objection on October 10, 2014, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the decision on May 15, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including the number of pages; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The legality of disposition.

A. The plaintiff's assertion is a farming part, without any other occupation, which engages in the cultivation of a farm company and a orchard. The plaintiff registered the address at the seat of the acquisition farmland of this case, and had been cultivated in F apartment and a resident registration address, and had been located in the acquisition farmland of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's residence at the seat of the acquisition farmland of this case exists, and a mountain village with F apartment.