Suwon District Court-2013-Gu Group-1045 ( December 06, 2013)

It is recognized that it was directly cultivated for not less than 3 years after acquisition of substitute farmland.

When a local government examines whether a substitute farmland actually cultivated with regard to the implementation of a direct payment system for preservation, such as rice income, etc., it is sufficiently recognized that the direct cultivation by the owner is actually cultivated.

Article 70 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act

Seoul High Court-2014Nu696 ( December 12, 2014)

United StatesA

○ Head of tax office

Suwon District Court-2013-Gu Group-1045 ( December 6, 2013)

October 31, 2014

December 12, 2014

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

1. Purport of claim

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of the capital gains tax of 2008 against the Plaintiff on April 2, 2012 is revoked.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance is revoked. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

This judgment is based on the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition of the following matters, and thus, it is based on Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(1) On Chapter 5, Chapter 14, "(the defendant asserts that he entrusted the management of the farmland of this case to Ansan, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it)" shall be added.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.