Whether Article 69 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (Reduction or Exemption of Transfer Income Tax on Self-Cultivating Farmland) is applicable.

The plaintiff's claim is without merit, since the plaintiff operated a collection of frequencies during the period of possession of the disputed land and objective evidentiary materials supporting his/her self-defense are not submitted.

Article 69 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act

Seoul High Court 2015Nu4010

***

$$$세무서장

March 26, 2015

October 23, 2015

November 20, 2015

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The transfer income tax for the year 2009 reverted to the Plaintiff on July 4, 2012 by the Defendant 120;

459,610 won for special rural development and 17,707,480 won for special rural development shall be revoked.

1. Quotation of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance;

The reasons for this judgment shall be with the exception of dismissal or addition of the following:

For the same reason, Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

this shall be quoted.

(1) Class 5 "A 6, 11" shall be proved to be "A 5, 6, and 11".

(2) On the 6th page, the following shall be added:

(9) On March 11, 2008, the date of the issuance of documents, the farmland ledger No. 9

not only data that can be found, but also that the plaintiff's self-defense for not less than eight years.

"Points"

2. Conclusion

Thus, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance shall conclude this conclusion.

Inasmuch as the Plaintiff’s appeal is justifiable, it is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

corporation.