The restriction and prohibition provisions of the Foreign Exchange Control Act are the excessive restriction regulations to promote the development of the national economy, and therefore, even if an act is in conflict with the above restriction regulations, it does not affect the judicial effect of the act (see Supreme Court Decision 72Da2161 delivered on April 22, 1975), it is a party member's opinion (see Supreme Court Decision 72Da2161 delivered on April 22, 1975);

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, considering that the disposal or acquisition of real estate in violation of the above restriction provisions is invalid, the court below held that the plaintiff, a non-resident, did not obtain the permission of the Minister of Finance and Economy when acquiring the land of this case, which is a domestic real estate, and rejected the plaintiff's claim on the ground that the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the plaintiff was invalid due to lack of the cause. Thus, the judgment below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the restriction provisions of the same Act, thereby misunderstanding the application of the substantive law, and it seems that the grounds for appeal of this case are included in the grounds for appeal, and therefore, it is reasonable to reverse the original judgment.

Therefore, the judgment on the remaining grounds of appeal is omitted, and the case is remanded to the court below for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jung-young (Presiding Justice)