1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. From Jun. 20, 2003, the Plaintiff purchased the purchase price of KRW 547,500,000 in Gyeyang-si Co., Ltd. for KRW 770 square meters. On September 15, 2003, the Plaintiff purchased KRW 122 square meters in E from D for KRW 100,000,000.

B. On March 24, 2008, among the 770 square meters in Yangsan-si, 42 square meters and E, 122 square meters, eight square meters in total were expropriated in Yangsan-si due to the implementation of the construction of a road construction project for the construction of a F urban planning site, and was divided from the said land.

C. On July 10, 2015, the Plaintiff sold the instant land in total at KRW 1,470,000,000, the sales price of KRW 114 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) to G in Gyeyang-si, Yangsan-si and KRW 728 square meters and E 114 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”). On August 27, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with G on the instant land.

On October 31, 2015, the Plaintiff reported and paid capital gains tax of KRW 8,045,106 by applying special long-term holding deduction amounting to 257,58,464 won and capital gains tax reduction of KRW 200,000,000 as stipulated in Article 69(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act on the premise that the instant land falls under one of one’s own farmland for at least eight years.

E. The defendant conducted an investigation of the plaintiff's preliminary return of capital gains tax and required to reduce capital gains tax on self-arable farmland

On November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff notified the Plaintiff of KRW 360,468,960 of the transfer income tax attributed to November 1, 2015, deeming that it was not subject to the special deduction for long-term holding.

(f) The Plaintiff appealed and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on January 2, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1, 3 through 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion is that the plaintiff directly cultivated the land of this case for not less than 8 years and sold the land of this case and acquired and continuously cultivated another farmland. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion is about 8 years or more as stipulated in Article 69 (1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act.