The meaning of farmland as of the transfer date subject to non-taxation of capital gains

As of the date of transfer under Article 5 subparagraph 6 (d) of the Income Tax Act, Article 14 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 5 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, the term "farmland as of the date of transfer" is required to be farmland at the time of the conclusion of the transfer contract. Even if the transferee received the land and became a site before the intermediate payment or the payment of the remainder after the conclusion of the transfer contract, the transfer income tax shall not be levied until the time of the transfer contract.

Article 5 subparagraph 6 (d) of the Income Tax Act, Article 14 (3) of the Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act, Article 5 of the Enforcement Rule of the Income Tax Act

Attorney Park Jong-ho, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Head of Western Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 82Gu891 delivered on December 7, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

(1) According to Article 5 subparag. 6(d) of the Income Tax Act, Article 14(3) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, and Article 5 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act, the transfer income tax shall not be imposed on the income accruing from the transfer of land actually used for farming for at least eight consecutive years as of the date of transfer until the date of transfer, which is the object of the farmland tax. Here, as of the date of transfer, the term "farmland" is interpreted to the purport that it is required to be farmland at the time of the conclusion of the transfer contract, and even if the transferee transferred the land under the contract and transferred the land before the intermediate payment or remaining payment was made, the transfer income tax shall not be imposed if the land is self-owned for at least eight

(2) The court below held that the land category of this case was originally purchased and cultivated on or around March 1962 by the plaintiff, and around May 1983, the non-party 1 and the non-party 7,5630,000 won, which was the housing construction business operator, concluded a sales contract and received 7 million won as the down payment on the day, and the intermediate payment 40,000 won was agreed to be paid on November 10 of the same year as the remainder payment on the 30th of the same month. Under the plaintiff's understanding, the above non-party 1 started to construct the apartment house after obtaining a construction permit under the name of the non-party 17 and started to construct the apartment house and completed the construction on December 12, 1980. The court below determined that the land category of this case was changed to the land category of the non-party 17,000 won, and that the transfer of this case's land should not be deemed to constitute the transfer of the above land under the name of the plaintiff 1 and the non-party 1.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jung-soo (Presiding Justice) and Lee Jong-young's Lee Jong-young