Suwon District Court 2008Guu1243 (Law No. 205, 2009)

Early High Court Decision 2008J 2184 (2008.03)

Whether farmland has been actually depreciated or not;

Examining whether or not farmland substitute land has been self-confiscated, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff was not self-confiscated for three or more years prior to the transfer of farmland on the ground that: (a) the Plaintiff gave birth to each of five years prior to the acquisition of farmland and two years prior to the acquisition of farmland; (b) the Plaintiff prepared a written confirmation that farmland was leased to another person in

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. Costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke the disposition of imposition of capital gains tax of KRW 183,550,490 against the plaintiff on March 3, 2008.

The reasoning for this Court’s reasoning is as follows: even if the Plaintiff’s assertion was based on the evidence presented by the Plaintiff, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff had cultivated the farmland in this case and the newly acquired farmland, and thus, it is identical with the judgment of the first instance.

Therefore, the judgment of the first instance court is legitimate, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.