The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, Article 17(2)4 of the former Value-Added Tax Act (amended by Act No. 9268 of Dec. 26, 2008; hereinafter the same) provides that “the input tax amount related to the business that supplies goods or services exempt from value-added tax (including the input tax amount related to investment) and the land-related input tax amount as prescribed by the Presidential Decree shall not be deducted from the output tax amount.” Article 60(6) of the Enforcement Decree of the said Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 21304 of Feb. 4, 2009) provides that “the “the input tax amount related to the land as prescribed by the Presidential Decree” under Article 17(2)4 of the Act refers to the input tax amount related to the capital expenditure related to the creation, etc. of the land, which falls under any of the following subparagraphs.”

Meanwhile, Article 12(1)12 of the former Value-Added Tax Act stipulates “land” as one of tax-free goods.

According to the relevant provisions, since the acquisition value and the input tax amount for the ancillary expenses incurred by the tax-free entrepreneur who supplies tax-free land in acquiring the land as the inventory assets are the input tax amount related to the tax-free business under Article 17(2)4 of the former Value-Added Tax Act, it should not be deducted from

The judgment below

According to the reasons and records, the plaintiff acquired land for the new apartment construction project from the second half of 2006 to the second half of 2008.