1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On March 12, 1990, the Plaintiff acquired 2,271m2, C, 164m2, D, and 1,973m2 (hereinafter “instant land”). On December 20, 2013, the Plaintiff transferred 733,400,000 won to Dong-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City (amended by Act No. 13560, Dec. 15, 2015; hereinafter the same) and reported capital gains tax on the said land to the Defendant by applying the reduction or exemption of capital gains tax for self-employed farmland prescribed in Article 69 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 13560, Dec. 15, 2015).

B. Meanwhile, the Defendant issued a revised notice of KRW 232,027,730, on December 1, 2015, on the ground that the Plaintiff had not cultivated the said land directly for at least eight years as a result of the investigation of capital gains tax on the instant land.

(hereinafter “Disposition in this case”). / [Grounds for recognition] The entry in Gap evidence 1, 2, and Eul evidence 1 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. Considering that the Plaintiff’s assertion is the farmland ledger, membership certificates, agrochemicals, and fertilizer purchase details, the details of subsidies for rice farming, the fact-finding of neighboring residents, etc., the certificate of registration of agricultural business entities, etc., and the book stores are operated under the Plaintiff’s name of the Plaintiff’s spouse E, and even if the Plaintiff’s spouse was in office as a full-time director, this does not require full-time work; the date when the Plaintiff was engaged in the lease business or as a part-time director; the date when the Plaintiff was engaged in the loan of agricultural machinery through neighboring residents is merely 3-4 days during a year farming; and around 190, when the Plaintiff purchased and cultivated the land other than the instant land and transferred the land to another person in 203, and was subject to reduction or exemption of capital gains tax on the

Therefore, the instant disposition on a different premise should be revoked in an unlawful manner.

B. Relevant statutes are attached thereto.