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 April 10, 1996, the Plaintiff acquired B 1,500 square meters and C 579 square meters and C 579 square meters, D 119 square meters and E 88 square meters (hereinafter “instant farmland”) and transferred the instant farmland on October 30, 2009.

B. On November 30, 2009, the Plaintiff filed an application for reduction of or exemption from capital gains tax on the ground that the Plaintiff, while filing a scheduled return of tax base for capital gains tax on the farmland of this case with the Defendant on the ground that the said land was self-

C. The Defendant: (a) deemed that the Plaintiff did not directly cultivate the instant farmland for at least eight years; (b) denied the Plaintiff’s application for reduction of or exemption from capital gains tax; and (c) deemed the instant farmland as land for non-business use on August 1, 201 and notified the Plaintiff of the rectification of KRW 308,218,940 as income tax reverted to the year

(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.

The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal with the Tax Tribunal on November 14, 201, but was dismissed on November 14, 201, and thereafter filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with the District Court 201Gudan3140, but was dismissed on August 13, 2012, and thereafter, the Plaintiff’s appeal and appeal were dismissed, and the said dismissal ruling became final and conclusive on December 18, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 4 through 9 (including each number in the case of additional number), the whole purport of the pleading

2. In the case of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendant, on April 1, 2004, imposed capital gains tax on the Plaintiff by applying the special deduction for long-term holding on the transfer of F land which was subdivided in Namyang-si B among the instant farmland, but the Defendant deemed the non-business land and excluded the special deduction for long-term holding.

In addition, with respect to the case of transfer of G land in the south-si in the vicinity of the farmland in this case, the defendant was subject to an application for reduction of capital gains tax on June 9, 2005 by the plaintiff on the premise that the requirements for reduction of capital gains tax were met for 8 years.

The farmland in this case and the land F in Namyang-si and G is located.