beta
(영문) 대법원 1980. 2. 26. 선고 79다2094 판결

[토지인도][공1980.4.15.(630),12653]

Main Issues

Re-banking of any submerged land and the ownership of the previous owner;

Summary of Judgment

If the utility of land is lost because it is extremely difficult to restore due to the collapse of land, the previous ownership is permanently extinguished, and the previous owner may not acquire the ownership again even if the contaminated land is re-emuped.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 211 of the Civil Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 67Da213 Decided April 4, 1967

Plaintiff, the deceased and the deceased

[Judgment of the court below]

Defendant-Appellee

Defendant 1 and nine others

original decision

Seoul High Court Decision 79Na1430 delivered on October 26, 1979

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since this land was located below the original stream of 1000,000 and was located below the original stream of 7 years prior to its enforcement, as stated in its holding, and its ground fell below the river basin as it was low, and there were about 10 meters for the river basin, and about 5 meters for the river basin, and about 9 meters for the land was set up at 7 years prior to its enforcement, and there were no errors in the law by misapprehending the legal principles as seen above, since it was 7 years prior to its enforcement, since the land was located below the original stream of 17 years prior to its enforcement, it was hard to find that the land was destroyed as 97 years prior to its enforcement, and there were no errors in the law by misapprehending the legal principles as seen above, since it was impossible for the plaintiff to acquire the ownership of the land as 977 years prior to its enforcement since it was hard to obtain the ownership of the land as above, and there were no such errors in the law as the court below's decision.

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

Justices Kim Yong-chul (Presiding Justice)