Seoul High Court 2010Nu24076 ( November 15, 2011)

Early High Court Decision 2009Du1616 (Law No. 24, 2009)

(C) It is difficult to recognize that not less than 1/2 of the farming work was directly cultivated with his own labor;

In full view of the fact that the member of the local constituency was working as a member of the local constituency, the fact that the business income has been paid for the several years to joint business operators of the two manufacturing places, and the fact that the purchase receipt of fertilizers, etc. has been self-camped for eight years, it is insufficient to recognize that he/she was in charge of not less than 1/2 of the agricultural work.

Article 69 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act

2011Du30694 Transfer detailed and revocation of disposition

AA

Head of Namyang District Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2010Nu24076 Decided November 15, 2011

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but it is clear that the assertion on the grounds of appeal by the appellant falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final