The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1.(a)

Articles 95(2) and 104-3(1)4 of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 1358, Dec. 15, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Article 168-6 subparag. 1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26067, Feb. 3, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply) shall be deemed land subject to special deduction for long-term possession, in principle, of land falling under “non-business land” subject to exclusion from special deduction for long-term possession due to transfer where the period of possession is five years or more, the period exceeding two years in the preceding five years in the transfer, the period exceeding one year in the preceding three years in the transfer, and the period exceeding 20/100 of the ownership period in the preceding three years, and shall be excluded from the land subject to special deduction for long-term possession. However, the period falling under Article 104-3(1)4(b) of the Local Tax Act or subparagraph 1) shall be excluded from property tax subject to separate taxation.

Meanwhile, Article 106(1)2(a) of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Act No. 13636, Dec. 29, 2015; hereinafter the same) and Articles 101(1)2 and 103(1)1 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26836, Dec. 31, 2015; hereinafter the same) delegated by Article 106(1)2 of the former Local Tax Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26836, Dec. 31, 2015; hereinafter the same) provide for “land subject to separate taxation of property tax within the scope of the area calculated by multiplying the floor area of the building by the applicable multiple-use area among the land annexed to a building for which six months have not passed since the date of actual loss as of the taxable base date,” and “building” refers to “building with roof,

Article 104 subparagraph 2 and 2 of the former Local Tax Act.