8. Self-Governing farmland

The key land does not fall under a large-scale business area stipulated in relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, and even if the defendant has harmed the reduction or exemption of the land different from the key land, it is difficult to view it as a public opinion expressing the public opinion of the reduction or exemption of capital gains tax, and thus,

Article 69 (Abatement or Exemption of Transfer Income Tax for Self-Cultivating Farmland)

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant's disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 121,859,170 as of March 2, 2004 against the plaintiff and KRW 100,000 as of July 1, 2004 shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

The reasons why a member should explain this case are "I will not have 10 pages 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance." The statement of No. 34 alone is insufficient to regard the implementation of the project in accordance with the above 4-stage development plan as a phased implementation, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it." The statement of No. 33 alone is the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the case where there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, it is difficult to see it as it is in accordance with Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Conclusion

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.