1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The court's explanation concerning the instant case is about 2. D. of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is the part of the judgment as to the lawfulness of the instant disposition.

2) The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. [2] As to whether the Plaintiff acquired the substitute farmland of this case due to the necessity of cultivation, the substitute land of this case is a land scheduled to be transferred to an expressway private investment project zone by the public notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on March 4, 2010, and among them, the substitute land of this case is a land scheduled to be transferred to an expressway private investment project zone by the public notice of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs on June 15, 2012, and the fact that the substitute land of this case was expropriated on October 14, 2013.

However, in a case where farmland is cultivated and transferred and another farmland is acquired within one year, it shall be deemed to substitute farmland for cultivation, barring any special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 94Nu8518, Sept. 30, 1994). As seen earlier, Article 4 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23590, Feb. 2, 2012) provides, “If the land is expropriated within three years after new farmland is acquired through consultation and expropriation under the Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for Land, etc. for Public Works Projects or by expropriation under other Acts, it shall be deemed that the land was cultivated while residing in the seat of the farmland for three years or longer, even if the land was planned to be integrated into an expressway zone, the construction period of the said project is 60 months from the commencement date of the project, and the land is difficult for the plaintiff to accurately predict the actual expropriation date of the farmland in this case, and the farmland in this case.”