logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2018.06.28 2015두55769
농지전용부담금부과처분취소
Text

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

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Whether the instant land constitutes “farmland” under the Farmland Act subject to imposition of farmland preservation charges

A. We examine whether land category is forest land and land actually used as farmland should be treated as farmland from the imposition of charges.

(1) Article 38(1) of the Farmland Act provides that a person who intends to divert farmland after having gone through the procedures for permission, consultation, or reporting on diversion of farmland shall pay farmland preservation charges.

Therefore, in order to impose farmland preservation charges, land to be exclusively used should be subject to permission, consultation, and reporting procedures for farmland diversion under the Farmland Act.

Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Farmland Act (A)

The concept of farmland is defined as "a field, paddy field, orchard, and other land actually used for crops or for growing perennial plants regardless of the legal land category: Provided, That land prescribed by Presidential Decree, such as grassland created under the Grassland Act, shall be excluded."

According to delegation, Article 2 (2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26903, Jan. 19, 2016; hereinafter the same) lists the land excluded from farmland such as “land category is not a dry field, paddy field, orchard, but a land which has been continuously used for crops or for growing perennial plants under the subparagraphs of paragraph (1) for less than three years” (Article 1), “land the land category of which is a forest (excluding land falling under subparagraph 1) and is used for cultivating perennial plants under paragraph (1) 2 or 3 without changing the form and quality thereof (Article 2 (2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 26903, Jan. 19, 2016).”

In addition, Article 34 (1) 4 of the Farmland Act stipulates that a person who intends to divert farmland shall obtain permission for diversion of farmland in principle, but has illegally reclaimed without obtaining permission for diversion of farmland under Article 14 of the Mountainous Districts Management Act or filing a report on diversion of farmland under Article 15 of the same Act.

arrow