Seoul High Court-2016-Nu-62391 ( October 21, 2017)

Whether it constitutes land directly cultivated for not less than 8 years must be proved by the transferor.

The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff was engaged in the cultivation of crops or the growing of perennial plants in the farmland of this case for not less than eight years, or that not less than 1/2 of the farming work was cultivated or cultivated with the Plaintiff’s own labor, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it

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

2017Du40549 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

AAA

YThe director of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2016Nu62391 Decided March 21, 2017

July 11, 2017

1. The appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant.

All of the records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the grounds of appeal by the appellant are not included in the grounds provided by each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal. Thus, the appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent