The case holding that the agricultural cooperative is not a non-business land where the agricultural cooperative purchased the entire land of the building and used it as a parking lot with the owner of the building.

When an agricultural cooperative purchases a site on the front side of a building in which it is located, it cannot be deemed that the purpose of acquiring the site was speculative, and if the building was used for the convenience of its customers' access and parking, it is reasonable to deem that the building was a property which the association used directly for its own business even if it used the parking lot to the owner of the building, even if it was a three-dimensional building or a building, and it is not a non-business property of the association.

Article 9(1) of the Regulation of Tax Reduction and Exemption Act, Articles 11(2) and 16(2) of the Presidential Emergency Decree, Article 180 of the Local Tax Act, Article 131(2) of the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 3 others

A variety of litigation performers, e.g., Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

Seoul High Court Decision 76Gu779 delivered on March 14, 1978

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal regarding the entry in the final appeal of the Defendant Litigation Performers and Lee Jae-de are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment, the court below held that the plaintiff's construction site was legitimate in 1969, and that the plaintiff's construction site was no longer owned by the non-party 1's association's non-party 1's construction site, and that the non-party 1's construction site was no longer owned by the non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's building site.

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 Lee Young-young (Presiding Justice)