Suwon District Court-2017-Gu Group-1609 ( December 8, 2017)

Disposition taxable by excluding the application of capital gains tax reduction or exemption for the transferred land after the lapse of three years from the date of incorporation into a residential area is legitimate.

Farmland incorporated in a residential area under the proviso of Article 66 (4) 1 (b) of the Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act refers to farmland incorporated in a residential area due to the execution of a specific development project.

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

Seoul High Court-2017-Nu-90416 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax.

AA

O Head of tax office

Suwon District Court Decision 2017Gudan1609 Decided December 8, 2017

May 21, 2018

June 27, 2018

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's imposition of ○○○ (including additional taxes) of capital gains tax belonging to the year 2015 against the plaintiff on June 9, 2016 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasoning for this Court concerning this case is as follows, since the reasoning for this Court is the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal or addition of part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the meaning of the language used in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (hereinafter the meaning of the language used in this case is the same as the judgment of

2. Parts used or added;

Part 2 of the table below the second one is " February 16, 2002" as " February 16, 200".

Part 3 of the third top table "for the reason that it is not eligible for reduction or exemption of self-farmland" shall be applied to "for the reason that it is not eligible for reduction or exemption of farmland on behalf of farmland".

Part III, Chapters 19 through 6, " shall be entitled to ......................"

Article 70 (1) (main sentence) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 13560, Dec. 15, 2015; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the main sentence of Article 70 (1) of the same Act stipulate that "in cases prescribed by Presidential Decree for which residents residing in the seat of farmland have cultivated land directly in such manner as prescribed by Presidential Decree due to necessity for cultivation, the tax amount equivalent to 100/100 of capital gains tax shall be reduced or exempted." Paragraph (2) of the same Article provides that "in cases of land that is transferred or acquired pursuant to paragraph (1) is included in a residential area under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act or is prescribed by Presidential Decree as land other than land designated as reserved for replotting before replotting is taken place pursuant to the Urban Development Act or other Acts, it shall not apply." Article 67 (8) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26922, Jan. 22, 2016; hereinafter the same shall apply) provides for the same shall apply.

After the last 19th day, the following shall be added:

"The plaintiff (the plaintiff asserts on the basis of the provisions on reduction and exemption of self-arable farmland on the premise that the defendant did not apply reduction and exemption of self-arable farmland, but the provisions on reduction and exemption of farmland on the basis of the provisions on reduction and exemption of self-arable farmland are identical to the provisions on reduction and exemption of self-arable farmland in the case of actual problem in this case. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion is judged on the basis of the provisions on reduction and

The 7th one to 7th one shall be deleted, and the 9th, 14th, and 16th "Article 66(4)" shall be added to "Article 67(8)".

After the first day of the first sentence, the following shall be added:

In light of the proviso to Article 67 (8) 1 (c) of the Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act, "large-scale development projects are implemented within three years from the date of incorporation into a residential area, commercial area, or industrial area under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act", it is clearly divided into "cases of incorporation into a residential area, etc. due to the implementation of a development project" and "cases of implementation of a development project after incorporation into a residential area, etc.".

[C]

Article 66 (4) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act shall be construed as "Article 67 (8) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act", "Article 66 (4) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act" shall be construed as "Article 67 (8) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act", "Article 66 (4) of the 8th, 18th, 10th, and 7th, and 10th of each

Pursuant to the 8th sentence of the 10th page, the "Act on Self-Cultivating Farmland" shall be changed to "Act on Substitute Land for Farmland".

3. Conclusion

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