Main Issues

Ownership of the property of the Chuncheon Railroad Corporation before its promulgation No. 75

Summary of Judgment

On May 1942, a person who purchased a real estate owned by Chuncheon Railroad Corporation shall have no effect on the validity of the acquisition of the above ownership, even though he did not exercise the right to compensation within the period of possession after the public announcement of No. 75 (Abolition) of the laws and regulations that he/she acquired the ownership.

[Reference Provisions]

Law No. 75

Plaintiff-Appellant

Yellowland

Defendant-Appellee

South Dok-hee

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 57 civil service527 delivered on February 18, 1958, Seoul High Court Decision 57 civil service, which is decided on February 18, 1958

Reasons

The facts that the Plaintiff purchased the real estate in May 1942, which was the first Japanese company, around the 1942. Thus, the court below was legally established. Thus, the ownership of the real estate at the time of the contract for sale and purchase of the real estate was transferred to the Plaintiff, unless otherwise agreed upon by the court below, and the ownership of the real estate at the time of the contract for sale and purchase of the real estate was transferred to the Plaintiff. Unless there are special circumstances, such as that the ownership of the real estate at the time of the contract for sale and purchase of the real estate was returned to the electricity company due to non-performance of duties under the contract for sale and purchase of the Plaintiff's property at the time of the contract for sale and purchase, and the ownership of the real estate was not included in the ownership of the real estate which was acquired by the Government due to the promulgation under subparagraph 75 of the Act and subordinate statutes. Accordingly, the Plaintiff did not have any reason to lose the ownership of the real estate due to the promulgation under subparagraph 75 of the Act and subordinate statutes, and the Plaintiff was not entitled to claim compensation within the statutory deadline. It did not err by the court below.