Seoul High Court 2016Nu30479 ( August 17, 2016)

(C) Whether the land at issue is farmland for at least eight years and whether the land at issue is farmland

It is insufficient to recognize that he had been engaged in the cultivation of crops for not less than 8 years or had cultivated directly by cultivating not less than 1/2 of the farming work with his own labor, and it is reasonable to deem that the real area is a house under the Income Tax Act as a building actually being used for residence in spite of the area and purpose in the public register.

2016Du49198 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

Dog Dog

OO Head of the tax office

Seoul High Court Decision 2016Nu30479 Decided 17, 2016

October 27, 2016

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

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

October 27, 2016

Justices Park Sang-ok

Justices Lee Sang-hoon

Justices Kim Chang-suk

Justices Jo Hee-de