1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

Details of the disposition

On December 2, 2013, the Plaintiff acquired land B in Jung-gu, Daejeon (hereinafter “instant land”) and 288 square meters in December 27, 2013, as an agricultural company established for the purpose of cultivating and selling didy, seedlings, organic farming vegetables, lost trees, etc.

On December 26, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application for exemption from acquisition tax, etc. on the instant land pursuant to Article 11(1) of the former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act (amended by Act No. 12175, Jan. 1, 2014; hereinafter “former Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act”) on the ground that the instant land constitutes real estate acquired by an agricultural company within two years from the date of its establishment in order to use it for farming, and the Defendant exempted the Plaintiff from acquisition tax, etc. on the instant land.

As a result of a local business trip investigation on the instant land on December 29, 2014, the Defendant determined that the Plaintiff did not directly use the instant land for farming without justifiable grounds until one year after the date of acquisition thereof, and directed the Plaintiff to pay the acquisition tax reduced or exempted on the same day by voluntary report.

On March 10, 2015, the Plaintiff did not file a voluntary report on acquisition tax, etc., and the Defendant imposed and collected KRW 3,980,000 on the instant land and KRW 796,000 for special rural development tax (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

On May 18, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an objection against the Defendant on May 18, 2015, but the Daejeon Metropolitan City Mayor dismissed the Plaintiff’s objection on July 1, 2015, following a resolution of the Local Tax Deliberative Committee.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, 7 through 9, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 through 7, 9 through 14, and 18, and the purport of the entire pleadings as to the legitimacy of the disposition of this case as to whether the disposition of this case is legitimate or not, the plaintiff's assertion that the land of this case was not used for farming until one year after the date of acquisition of the land of this case, is not used for farming

The instant land.