Land and buildings thereon belong to the same owner, but if the two owners are different from each other due to sale or other cause, legal superficies according to custom to be acquired by the building owner.

01. When land and its buildings intend to belong to the same owner, and the owner of both parties becomes different due to sale land and other causes, the building owner acquires legal superficies according to custom unless there are special circumstances.

Articles 279, 305(1), and 366 of the Civil Act

Daegu Heavy Industries Corporation

Korea

Daegu District Court Decision 60No742 delivered on May 25, 1961

We reverse the original judgment.

This case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

The grounds of appeal on the Defendant’s Han-chul are the same as the statement of the appellate brief subsequent to it.

Therefore, in order to recognize the value of an independent real estate which has the usefulness as a building, land usage relationship cannot be deemed an indivisible relationship for the sake of the building. If land and a building belong to the same owner, land use relationship for the purpose of the building should not be considered as an indivisible relationship. In addition, if the land and a building belong to the same owner, the land use relationship for the purpose of the building should be incorporated into land ownership and there is no practical benefit to think of the use relationship between the land and the building separately, or if the two owners do not think of the rational use relationship between the two. Therefore, even if our Civil Act, which recognizes legal superficies as an independent real estate separately from the building and the land, recognizes legal superficies under certain conditions, even if the land and the land are not satisfied, if the owner of the building or the land belongs to the same owner, and if the two owners of the building and the building are removed for reasons other than the sale of the building or the removal of the building by the legal superficies under the Civil Act, the lower court’s conclusion that there is no special error in the construction of the land and the construction of the building to be no dispute between the Plaintiff and the building.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge)