[소유권확인][공1980.10.15.(642),13102]
Acquisition of land and extinction of private rights;
If the land has fallen in the middle half of the 1940s and was in the state of river area for not less than 20 years, the previous private right to the land has been permanently extinguished due to the decline, and even if the land has been re-emuped thereafter, the previous private right to the land has not been restored.
Article 211 of the Civil Act
Supreme Court Decision 64Da1951 Delivered on March 30, 1965
Plaintiff 1 and 12 others, Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellant
Representative of the Republic of Korea Act of the Republic of Korea and the Minister of Justice Kim Young-su, Kim Jong-dae
Defendant 1 and 24 others
Seoul High Court Decision 78Na2756 delivered on February 21, 1979
All appeals are dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Each of the grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs' attorneys is examined together.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the land of this case, other than the plaintiffs 10, was not entered into the above river area or entered into the 19th anniversary of the fact that it was impossible for the above 7th anniversary of the fact that the land was purchased in the above 7th anniversary of the fact that the above 7th anniversary of the fact that the above 4th anniversary of the fact that the above 7th anniversary of the fact that the above 4th anniversary of the above 7th anniversary of the fact that the above 7th anniversary of the above 7th anniversary of the fact that the above 4th anniversary of the above 7th anniversary of the fact that the above 4th anniversary of the above 7th anniversary of the fact that the above 3th anniversary of the above 4th anniversary of the fact that the above 6th anniversary of the above 3th anniversary of the fact that the above 6th anniversary of the above 3th anniversary of the fact that the above 6th anniversary of the fact that the above 6th anniversary of the above 3th anniversary of the fact that the above 3th new 3th of the lower court's.
There is no illegality in the judgment of the court below, such as the theory of lawsuit.
In addition, the judgment of the court below against the plaintiff 10, according to the judgment of the court of first instance as to the plaintiff 10, it is evident that the plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on March 13, 1975 as of the land owned by the plaintiff 10 on the ground that the plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of sale on March 13, 1975, which was after the filing of the lawsuit as to the land owned by the plaintiff 10, and the plaintiff's assertion under the premise that the title of the land still belongs to the plaintiff 10, unless there are any special circumstances, is no illegality in the judgment of the court below
Therefore, all appeals are dismissed without merit. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Ahn Byung-soo (Presiding Justice)