Reduction of or exemption from capital gains tax for self-farmland for 8 years;

It is difficult to see that it was in a direct manner due to the details of concluding a lease contract on occupation and land.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 88,953,430 for the Plaintiff on December 3, 2008 shall be revoked.

1. Circumstances of the disposition;

A. On January 1, 1971, the Plaintiff was admitted to the MPM Corporation on January 10, 2008, while he inherited from NAB the Plaintiff’s NP-dong 309-1, 945 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On February 28, 2008, the Plaintiff made a preliminary return on the transfer income tax by applying the reduction or exemption of the transfer income tax pursuant to Article 69 of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 9276 of Dec. 29, 2008) to the Defendant on the basis that he/she himself/herself has cultivated the instant land for at least eight years, and paid KRW 51,29,400 to the Defendant.

C. However, on December 3, 2008, the Defendant imposed a capital gains tax of KRW 105,460,000 on the Plaintiff in 2007 on the ground that the Plaintiff could not be deemed to have self-employed for at least eight years (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

D. Meanwhile, on March 17, 2009, the Defendant reduced or corrected ex officio the capital gains tax of 88,953,430 won, which applied 10% reduction or exemption on the ground that the instant land was expropriated for public works.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3, 6 evidence, Eul 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

The land of this case was cultivated by the deceased BB, which was the plaintiff's reference on March 28, 1965, acquired and cultivated the ownership of the land of this case, and the plaintiff succeeded to the land of this case on January 1, 1971, and jointly did not appear to be the farmer until April 9, 1984, and thereafter, the land of this case cannot be viewed as being illegally occupied by the tenant CC, etc. until the land is expropriated. Thus, the disposition of this case on the premise that the plaintiff did not own the land of this case for not less than eight years should be revoked illegally.

B. Determination

In light of the above facts, it is difficult to believe that the Plaintiff himself/herself or during the period of 8 years or longer, and the testimony of Gap evidence 7-1, Eul evidence 15-1, and the witness testimony of Gap evidence 17-1, Eul evidence 17-2, and Eul evidence 18-2, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this. Rather, according to the above facts, the Plaintiff continued to reside in the above 5-year land from Seoul High School from October 1, 1979 to October 15, 198, and from Seoul High School from 197 to 198, the Plaintiff continued to reside in the above 9-1, Seoul High School from 197 to 196-1, 198, and the Plaintiff continued to reside in the above 5-year land from 0-1, Seoul High School from 1979 to 16-1, 1985 to 3-1, 196, 196.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.