Seoul High Court 2011Nu8125 (Law No. 26, 2011)

Cho High Court Decision 2010Du0082 ( October 24, 2010)

(C) The farmland under the Farmland Act is not immediately subject to the reduction or exemption of capital gains tax.

(C) No evidence exists to prove that the land was actually used for cultivation at the time of the expropriation of the land, and even if there is no evidence to prove that the land was used for the cultivation of the land, it is difficult to recognize it as farmland subject to capital gains tax reduction or exemption, and there is no evidence to prove that the land was used for the cultivation of the land.

Article 69 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (Reduction or Exemption of Transfer Income Tax for Self-Cultivating Farmland)

2011Du23887 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

KimA

Head of Eastern Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu8125 Decided August 26, 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 are examined, but the argument on the grounds of appeal does not include the grounds provided in each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, or is deemed groundless, and the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per

Reference materials.

If the grounds of final appeal are not included in the grounds of final 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 trial without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal, and refers to the system of dismissal of final appeal by judgment without continuing the deliberation on the merits of the grounds of final appeal (see this case, e.g.,