Farmland as of the date of transfer shall not be deemed farmland unless it is in a temporary state of suspension.

It cannot be viewed as farmland as of the date of transfer, unless it is in a state of temporary absence or temporary absence by the landowner, and it does not constitute the object of non-taxation.

Article 69 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act for Self-Cultivating Farmland

2014Gudan288 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing Capital Gains Tax

EO

OO Head of the tax office

January 20, 2015

February 10, 2015

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Cheong-gu Office

The Defendant’s imposition disposition of capital gains tax and special rural development tax for the year 2010 on May 3, 2012 on the Plaintiff ○○○, respectively, shall be revoked, respectively.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On November 2, 2006, the plaintiffs are divided into ○○○○○○○ 60-1 orchard 3,898 square meters (which remains after being divided into 683-3, 683-5, Nov. 12, 2002, and July 9, 2009) and 683-2, 2,429 square meters (which remains after being divided into 683-10, and 683-2, 683-12, 683-13 of the same Act on July 9, 2009; hereinafter the above 683-1 and 683-2 of the same Act "the land of this case") for each 1/2 of the shares of the division, and transfer the ownership transfer registration to the Korea Land and Housing Corporation after being made a public inspection on June 1, 2006 (hereinafter "the land of this case").

B. On August 31, 2010, the Plaintiffs reported the transfer income tax on the instant land, and applied the reduction or exemption pursuant to Article 69 of the former Special Cases Restriction Act (amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010; hereinafter the same).

C. On May 3, 2012, the Defendant denied the reduction and exemption by deeming the instant land as not one of its own farmland at the time of transfer, and notified the Plaintiff ○○○○ of the correction and notification of the tax amounting to KRW 107,248,460 (including additional tax) and KRW 111,626,270 (including additional tax) to the Plaintiff △△△△△△, respectively (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

D. The Plaintiffs appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal, but the dismissal on December 10, 2013

was made.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 1-1, 2-2

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

Since the acquisition of the land in this case in 1971 and the death of the deceased, the non-party 1, who was employed by the plaintiffs, carried out a farming house directly, such as sweak tree, sweak tree cultivation and sweak cultivation, and after the deceased of the deceased, the plaintiffs succeeded to the land. The land in this case, which was located between forest and sweakland, could not be viewed as a farming house until 2007 due to the development work of neighboring land, such as 600-5 divided from the land in this case, was a sweak sloped. After the completion of the land creation work around 2008, the plaintiff △△△△△△ made efforts to re-sweak and sweak down, etc., in 2009, and the land in this case was announced as a land for public works projects on February 6, 2009, and the land in this case should be regarded as being subject to tax reduction and exemption as farmland under the laws and regulations.

B. Relevant statutes

It is as shown in the attached Form.

C. Determination

(1) Article 69 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23590, Feb. 2, 2012; hereinafter the same) provides that the meaning of direct cultivation is that a resident is engaged in cultivating crops or growing perennial plants in his/her own farmland, or cultivating or cultivating 1/2 or more of them with his/her own labor, by reducing the tax burden, and delegates specific standards to the Presidential Decree so that a person eligible for exemption can be flexibly determined. Article 66(13) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23590, Feb. 2, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply) provides that the meaning of "one-half or more of them's own labor" shall be strictly interpreted as "one-half or more of them's own labor" in accordance with the literature (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Du1970, Dec. 27, 2012).

(2) In light of the above legal principles, comprehensively taking into account the following facts: (a) the public health room; (b) Gap evidence Nos. 10-1 through 7; (c) Eul evidence Nos. 11-1 through 12; and (d) Eul evidence Nos. 2 through 8; and (c) the overall purport of the pleadings was as follows: (a) the land creation work was conducted around the land of this case from 2007 to 2008; (c) the original ○○ 60-5; and (d) the building was newly constructed; and (e) the most of the area of this case’s land was changed to a slope behind the loan; (b) the slope was left alone; (c) the Korea Land and Housing Corporation did not have any investigation into obstacles to the instant land; and (d) the Plaintiff ○○ was not able to see that he was engaged in the above-mentioned temporary operation of the accommodation business at the time of her expiration of the night.

(3) Therefore, the disposition of this case by the Defendant, which corrected the tax amount by deeming that the land of this case is not subject to reduction of self-farmland, is legitimate, and there is no error as alleged by the Plaintiff.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.