logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1968. 3. 5. 선고 68다86 제2부판결
[연원광석인도][집16(1)민,146]
Main Issues

Ownership and possessory right of minerals themselves owned by a person who has purchased mining rights and has not yet completed the registration of transfer;

Summary of Judgment

A person who has not completed the registration of transfer of mining rights even after purchasing and delivering mining facilities within the registered mining area and mining area has no ownership, possessory right and right to mine for the mineral itself existing in the mineral deposits of the mining area.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 5 of the Mining Industry Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

Plaintiff

Defendant-Appellee

Defendant

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul Central District Court Decision 67Na682 delivered on November 30, 1967

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

The plaintiff's attorney's ground of appeal (Nos. 1 and 2) shall be determined.

As stated in Article 5 of the Mining Industry Act, the mining right refers to the right to mine registered minerals and other minerals buried in the same mineral deposit as the registered minerals within a certain land zone (mining area). As such, the mining right holder purchased all the registered mining area and the mineral mining facilities within the mining area from his mining right holder to pay in full, and the person who has not yet completed the registration of transfer of the mining right has not yet completed the registration of transfer of the mining right shall not be entitled to claim ownership or right of the minerals existing in the mineral deposit within the mining area (i.e., the ownership or right of possession, as well as the right to mine) from the mining area. Therefore, even if the original judgment was registered in the joint name of the defendant and the non-party 1 and the non-party 2-3, and the defendant's joint mining right holder is the representative, the defendant purchased the mining right from his joint mining area to his majority opinion that the plaintiff is not entitled to claim ownership or right of transfer of the mining area, as alleged in its reasoning, and it cannot be asserted that the plaintiff's right of possession and right is still within the mining area.

Judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Ma-dong (Presiding Judge) and Ma-dong Mabbbble Ma

arrow