Whether it falls under the standing timber prescribed in Article 104-2-3 of the Local Tax Act in cases where planting trees constitute a single forest due to concentration thereof.

If the trees purchased by the Plaintiff fall under 70 to 80 percent of the total trees planted on the same ground, and thus, constitute a single forest overpopulated, this constitutes a standing timber prescribed in subparagraphs 2-3 and 105 of Article 104 of the Local Tax Act.

Articles 104 and 105 of the Local Tax Act

Attorney Yang Jae-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Leeyang-gun et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 82Gu36 delivered on October 28, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment of the court below recognized that the plaintiff's act of fact-finding and the interpretation and application of laws and regulations in the court below's above fact-finding and the judgment of the court below are justified, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of law as pointed out in the plaintiff's theory, since part 27 kinds, Dohap 28,407, which was planted on the land other than 5 lots of land outside Gyeonggi-do ( Address omitted) that were purchased on August 1, 1980 from the non-party, constitutes 70 to 80 percent of the total trees planted on the above ground, and constitutes a single forest densely concentrated. In light of the records, the above fact-finding of the court below and the judgment of the court below cannot be adopted since there were no errors of law as pointed out.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)