1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are apparent or apparent in records in this court:

On July 23, 2001, the Plaintiff: (a) received a successful bid of KRW 573 square meters in 27,750,000 for miscellaneous land B in Gyeonggi-do (hereinafter “instant land”); and (b) completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant land on July 24, 2001; (c) transferred the instant land to C and D on July 9, 2014, and paid KRW 117,000,000 to the Defendant on September 30, 2014, applying the special deduction for long-term possession amounting to KRW 25,908,390,00 for the special deduction for long-term possession to the Defendant on September 30, 2014.

B. The Defendant deemed that the instant land constitutes a non-business land under Article 104-3(1) of the former Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 12852, Dec. 23, 2014; hereinafter the same) and thus is not subject to the special deduction for long-term holding, and thus, notified the Plaintiff of the rectification of KRW 8,191,100 for the transfer income tax reverted to the year 2014 on March 21, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant disposition”). C.

On March 6, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking revocation of the instant disposition, asserting that “The instant land was used only as a temporary cultivation from May 2012 to July 2014, and as such, as it was used as a site for camping, it does not constitute a non-business land when based on miscellaneous land which is a land category registered in the public register, not farmland.”

(Seoul District Court rendered a judgment of the first instance that dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on September 6, 2017. The reason is that “The land of this case is miscellaneous until December 31, 2012, and is farmland under Article 168-8(1) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Income Tax Act from January 1, 2013, and all are land for non-business and is not subject to special deduction for long-term possession, so the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.”

The plaintiff filed an appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance (Tgu High Court 2017Nu6908), but the Daegu High Court on January 26, 2018.