Main Issues

The actual cases where the revocation of the loan contract under the State Properties Act was filed by the administrative litigation;

Summary of Judgment

Even if the target shares are private property, and even if the defendant regarded it as the vested property and leased it to the other party, the lease disposition of the defendant was converted into a private corporation loan agreement under the State Property Act on January 1, 1965 pursuant to the provisions of this Article, so the plaintiff who disputes the above lease disposition can be relieved by means of civil procedure, but it cannot be relieved by administrative litigation on the premise that the lease disposition, which is an administrative disposition, is a civil procedure.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 5 of the Addenda of the Act on Special Measures for the Disposal of Property Reversion

Plaintiff-Appellant

Plaintiff

Defendant-Appellee

The Director of Incheon Tax Office

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 66Gu353 delivered on February 16, 1967

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The plaintiff's grounds of appeal are examined as follows. According to the facts established by the court below, as to the 4/10 portion of the plaintiff's assertion of this case's lease to the non-party on February 19, 1962, and no sales contract was concluded until December 31, 1964, the lease disposition against the non-party like the defendant of this case was converted into a private loan agreement under the State Property Act in January 1, 1965 pursuant to Article 5 of the Addenda of the Act on Special Measures for the Management of Property Belonging to the non-party. The purpose of this case's lease is the plaintiff's private property, and even if the defendant's lease disposition is regarded as the property belonging to this case's own property, the defendant's lease disposition is converted into a private loan agreement and can not be recovered by civil litigation, and the plaintiff's lease disposition can not be recovered by civil litigation. The judgment below is just and the defendant's lease contract under the State Property Act is a general lease contract or lease contract under the State Property Act.