Gangnam branch support-2015-Gux-1695 (2016.07)

early 2014 Middle 5005 ( December 31, 2014)

No person shall be a self-arable farmland for at least eight years for which capital gains tax is reduced.

It is insufficient to recognize that the farmland in question was directly cultivated by engaging in the cultivation of crops in the key farmland or cultivating one-half or more of the farming works with his own labor.

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

2015Nu105 Action claiming the revocation of disposition imposing capital gains tax

Park AA

○ Head of tax office

Chuncheon District Court Decision 2015Guhap1695 ( October 07, 2016)

2016.06.27

2016.07.25

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax and additional tax of KRW 000,000 for the plaintiff on March 5, 2014, which reverts to the plaintiff in 2010.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for the court's explanation on the instant case is the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is accepted in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (it is not sufficient objective evidence to deem that the Plaintiff cultivated directly by the Plaintiff even after re-examination of the whole evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, including the evidence additionally submitted by the court of first instance, and it is insufficient to dismiss the counterclaim

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.