Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu308 Decided July 13, 2011

early 2010 Heavy1940 ( October 24, 2010)

(C) A reduction or exemption by substitute land may not be applied if the land is not cultivated directly at the time of transfer.

(C) In order to reduce capital gains tax due to substitute farmland, it is reasonable to consider that the previous land should be directly cultivated at the time of the transfer of the previous land in order to reduce capital gains tax, and it cannot be interpreted that the previous land is included in the "large-scale land of farmland due to necessity for cultivation" if it is not cultivated directly at the time of the transfer of the previous land in spite of the total of three

Article 70 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act for Substitute Land for Farmland

2011Du18953 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing capital gains tax

KimA

Head of Three Tax Office

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Nu308 Decided July 13, 2011

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The records of this case and the judgment of the court below and the grounds of appeal were examined, but the argument on the grounds of appeal by appellant is clear that it falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal and therefore, the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the above Act. It is so decided as per

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final