Cho High 2012 Before 0897 (O. 30, 2012)

The previous land holding period is less than 3 years and does not meet the requirements for reduction and exemption by substitute land.

Since the previous land was acquired as a donation and was transferred for public service at the time when three years have not passed thereafter, the disposition that excluded the reduction or exemption of capital gains tax by deeming that it did not meet the requirements for reduction or exemption of capital gains tax on farmland is legitimate

Article 70 of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act

2012 old-gu 1117 Revocation of Disposition of Imposing Capital Gains Tax

Yellow AA

Head of Busan District Tax Office

July 26, 2012

September 7, 2012

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The Defendant’s disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 000 for the year 2010 against the Plaintiff on September 1, 2011 is revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On July 31, 2008, the Plaintiff: (a) took a gift of 000 OOri-ri 000 mix 3,984 m2,000 m2,000 m2,000 from the above land on June 14, 2010; (b) transferred the same m2,218 m2,000 m2 (hereinafter “instant land”) to Seosan-si for public works; and (c) acquired OOri 00,000 m2,114 m2,000 m2 from Seosan-si, Seosan-si on July 2, 2010.

B. On August 3, 2010, the Plaintiff reported to the Defendant the transfer income tax for 2011 following the transfer of four parcels of land owned by the Plaintiff, including the instant land, and applied Article 70(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 10406, Dec. 27, 2010; hereinafter the same) stipulating the reduction and exemption of transfer income tax for the instant land, and reported and paid 00 won of transfer income tax for the transfer of the remaining three parcels of land (hereinafter referred to as “BS land”).

C. On September 1, 2011, the Plaintiff imposed the transfer income tax of KRW 000 on the Plaintiff (00 won of the transfer income tax of the instant land + KRW 000 of the transfer income tax of the remaining land, and less than KRW 000, and less than KRW 100) on the ground that the Plaintiff’s holding period of the instant land does not meet the non-taxation requirements by substitute farmland for less than three years.

D. Thereafter, around July 3, 2012, after the filing of the instant lawsuit, the Defendant rendered a decision of correction to reduce the amount of the said capital gains tax by 000 won after subtracting the amount of the capital gains tax already paid by the Plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “the instant disposition”), and the Defendant’s disposition of imposition of capital gains tax on September 1, 201.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1 to 5, and the whole purport of the pleading

2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful

A. The plaintiff's assertion

Since the plaintiff cultivated the land of this case before being donated from referring, the plaintiff actually cultivated the land of this case for not less than three years, and thus it constitutes the requirements for reduction of capital gains tax due to farmland substitute land, the disposition of this case, which is otherwise reported, is unlawful.

B. Relevant statutes

The entries in the attached Table-related statutes are as follows.

C. Determination

The exemption from capital gains tax on the substitute land of farmland is ① 3 years or longer, and ② the person who directly cultivated the farmland after residing in the former farmland location (2 years in case of purchase by consultation, expropriation, etc. according to public works) 1 year or longer from the date of transfer of the previous farmland (2 years in case of expropriation) 3 years or longer, and ④ the land area to be newly acquired shall be 1/2 or more of the face value of the farmland to be transferred or 1/3 or more of the value of the farmland to be transferred (Article 70(1) of the former Restriction of Special Taxation Act, Article 67(3) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 23590, Feb. 2, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply) and Article 67(2) of the former Enforcement Decree of the Restriction of Special Taxation Act clearly provides that the Plaintiff shall be exempt from capital gains tax on the ground that he did not own the land for 3 years or more from the previous land.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.