(b) Relationship between the real estate in the name of Japanese Army and the real estate in the name of Japanese Army and the property in the Korean War;

(c) Procedures for nationalization of reverted property under Article 4 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Asset Management Act; and

B. The real estate in the Republic of Korea, which had been registered in the name of the Japanese government, prior to the piracy, is reverted to the property, and the so-called state-owned administrative property devolved to the Government of the Republic of Korea under Article 1 of the first Agreement on the Finance and Property between the Republic of Korea and the United States of America, which came into force on September 20, 1948, refers only to the property owned in Japan under the jurisdiction of the Department of

C. In the case of nationalization of reverted property pursuant to Article 4(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to the State Council, approval by the President is required as a result of the resolution of the State Council, and the measures of nationalization conducted without this procedure are not legally effective. However, only with respect to a nationalization plan, the above procedure may be taken and individual implementation may be entrusted to the relevant administration, and the above procedure may be taken with respect to the nationalization of reverted property, and if the procedure is followed in any way, it satisfies the requirements of Article 4(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff (defendant).

1. As to No. 1:

Article 422(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act provides a witness’s false statement, which is a ground for retrial, as evidence for fact-finding that affects the text of the judgment, refers to a case where the witness’s false statement, which is a ground for retrial under Article 422(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act, is provided as material for fact-finding. It includes not only direct evidence which serves as material for fact-finding, but also indirect evidence. If there is a probable possibility that the text of the judgment would change if there was no false statement. Thus, if only the remaining evidence, except the false statement, does not affect the text of the judgment, it does not constitute a ground for retrial even if the witness received a final judgment of conviction due to perjury. However, even if it is found by the remaining evidence other than the false statement, it does not constitute a ground for retrial even if it still arrived at the same conclusion as the judgment of the retrial court (see Supreme Court Decision 72Da63, Jun. 27, 1972; 74Da164381, Jul. 21, 1972).

2. As to subparagraph 2 (including the supplementary statement in the grounds of appeal):

The judgment of the court below was made on August 198, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry had been in possession of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry for the purpose of using the same Si-Gun as the Si-Gun-U.S. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-U. Si-K.

The real estate in the Republic of Korea, which had been registered in the name of the Japanese government since before the 1st century, is a property devolving upon the government of the Republic of Korea under Article 33 of the Military Affairs Act and Article 2 of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to the State of the Government of the Republic of Korea under Article 5 of the first Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of the United States. The so-called state-owned administrative property devolved to the Government of the Republic of Korea under Article 1 of the first Agreement shall refer only to the property belonging to Japan under the jurisdiction of the Government of the Republic of Korea before the 19th National Assembly (see Supreme Court Decision 66Da2323, Jan. 27, 197). The decision of the court below that the forest land in the Republic of Korea, which had been registered in the name of the Japanese government in the name of the head of the 19th National Assembly, shall belong to the State-owned property belonging to the Government of the Republic of Korea under Article 1 of the first Agreement, and thus, shall belong to the State-owned property.

3. As to No. 3:

In addition, it is clear that the judgment of the court below contains a violation of the rules of evidence and an incomplete hearing, and it does not fall under any of the subparagraphs of Article 11(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)