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 November 4, 2004, the Plaintiff: (a) acquired and owned a 3738 square meters in Gyeyang-gun B, Gyeyang-do; and (b) on August 9, 2006, the Plaintiff transferred the same on May 31, 2010 as the previous farmland of Gyeonggi-do divided in the foregoing B, Yangyang-gun, Yangpo-gun, 2,915 square meters; (c) 38 square meters in E field and 100 square meters in the above C field (hereinafter “the previous farmland of this case”).

After that, on July 2010, the Plaintiff applied Article 70(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (wholly amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010) stipulating the reduction or exemption of capital gains tax for substitute farmland in relation to the transfer income tax for the year 2010 following the transfer of the previous farmland of this case.

B. On February 22, 2011, the Plaintiff acquired 1,111 square meters in total and G 1,018 square meters in total with the said two land (hereinafter “the instant substitute farmland”).

C. The defendant failed to commence the cultivation of the substitute farmland of this case within one year from the date of transfer of the previous farmland of this case, and thus the plaintiff is required to reduce capital gains tax.

On November 16, 2012, the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of KRW 54,944,710 of the transfer income tax attributed to the year 2010.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

The plaintiff filed an objection and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, but the Tax Tribunal dismissed the appeal on September 3, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 2, and 3 (each number is included; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff acquired the farmland of this case within one year from the date of transfer of the previous farmland of this case, and continued to cultivate the farmland of this case directly until now. Thus, income from the transfer of the previous farmland of this case is due to the substitute land for self-arable land under Article 70 (1) of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act.