property shall not be deemed property devolving upon the State;

No State property under the jurisdiction of the Japanese governor before August 9, 1945 shall be the property devolving upon the State, and at the same time when the Republic of Korea is established, the State property shall be the State of the Republic of Korea, and at the same time when the United States Armed Forces acquired the ownership as of September 25, 1945 by the United States Armed Forces pursuant to subparagraph 33 of the United States Armed Forces Act

Military Affairs Act No. 33

Supreme Court Decision 65Da868 Decided September 6, 1966

Plaintiff

Countries

Daegu District Court Decision 66Na46 delivered on June 16, 1966

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

The first agreement on finance and property concluded between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of the United States of America is not included in state property prescribed in Article 5, and it is interpreted that the above state property was not included in the property acquired by the United States of America as of September 25, 1945 under Article 33 of the United States military law. Accordingly, this property is not so-called property belonging to the Republic of Korea, and it is not subject to the order of the Minister of Maritime Affairs on July 28, 1948, and it is also subject to the obligation of the Government of the Republic of Korea at the same time as the establishment of the Government of the Republic of Korea, and the obligation of the Government of the Republic of Korea in relation to the above state property shall also succeed to it at the same time as the establishment of the Government of the Republic of Korea. And the first agreement on the financial and property concluded between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of the United States of America was not included in the property belonging to the State property under Article 1, and there was no violation of the law of law by the court below regarding the non-party 10.

Therefore, the final appeal is without merit, and the costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court Dog-gu (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak and Mag-gu Mag-gu