Requirements for a person who purchased farmland before the enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act to acquire ownership without registration under the Farmland Reform Act.

If farmland was purchased and cultivated continuously before the enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act, and was excluded from farmland subject to general distribution even at the time of the enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act, the purchaser of farmland shall be deemed to have acquired ownership of farmland completely without registration under the Farmland Reform Act. Therefore, the purchaser of farmland shall not lose ownership or the seller’s heir shall not be deemed to have restored ownership even if the purchaser did not complete the registration by December 31, 1965 pursuant to Article 10 of the Addenda of the Civil Act. However, in order to apply the above legal doctrine, the purchaser of farmland shall purchase farmland before the enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act and take over it.

Article 6 of the Farmland Reform Act, Article 187 of the Civil Act, Article 10 of the Addenda to the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 72Da578 delivered on June 13, 1972 (Gong1974, 7909 delivered on June 11, 1974) 73Da1434 delivered on June 11, 1974 (Gong1974, 7909) Supreme Court Decision 94Da28253 delivered on November 8, 1994 (Gong194, 3244)

Freeboard, and four others (Attorneys Park Jong-ok, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

[Defendant, Appellant] 1 and 9 others (Law Firm Hann, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 94Na42183 delivered on July 30, 1996

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate brief).

1. The summary of fact-finding and judgment of the court below is as follows.

A. First of all, the lower court acknowledged the following facts by taking account of the adopted evidence as a whole, whether there is no dispute between the parties.

(1) On May 12, 1950, the first 1,016-1,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,0000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00,00,00.

(2) On January 3, 1949, the above Park Jong-man divided 1,016 1,016 Before the above subdivision into the land of this case and sold 14-5, 39, and 93, 14-4, 14, and 14-7, the land of this case, which was already divided into the register, to the non-party Cho Jong-young. On May 12, 1950, the above sale of each parcel of land was completed through the procedure for registration of subdivision, which was the registry office of the Seoul District Court, the registration office of the Seoul District Court, at the time of the above subdivision, for the above sale as 3107, for the reason of the above sale.

(3) However, when the registry of each of the above real estate was destroyed or lost, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the above franchisium was restored in the course of restoring it to the original state and completing the registration of restoration to the original state. However, with respect to the land of this case and the land of this case and the land of this case 14 to 93 of the same 14, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the above franchisium was not restored, and on February 5, 1976, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed on June 28, 1957 in the name of the head of the above franchisium, the head of the above franchisium, on which the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendants was completed in order, as stated in the order of the court below.

(4) Meanwhile, since the above land was handed over at the time of the above purchase, and occupied and cultivated it, the land in this case was excluded from farmland subject to general distribution, being recognized as farmland at the time of the enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act, and thereafter, the above land was again sold to the Non-Party Cho Jong-soo on January 15, 1962.

(5) However, after the death of July 22, 1962, the above ancestor cryp was succeeded to the property of the non-party who was his wife, the non-party cryp, the non-party cryp, the non-party cryp of his wife, the non-party cryp, the non-party cryp, the same ancestor cryp, the ancestor cryp, the collection of debts, the collection of debts, and the remaining debts. The whole order of the above death on June 27, 1986 and succeeded to the above mining virtue, the collection money, the collection money, the collection money, the collection money, the collection money, the collection money, and the remaining debts. The above assistance criteria died on September 18, 197, and died, the plaintiff cryp, the second cryp, the plaintiff cryp, the his wife, the plaintiff cryp, and the deceased's heir, the non-party 1 and the deceased's heir 3.

B. Moreover, the lower court determined as follows with respect to the Plaintiffs’ primary claims.

In other words, according to the above facts, so long as the above land was purchased on January 3, 1949 and the ownership transfer registration was made on May 12, 1950, the land of this case shall be deemed to be the ownership of the above grade. Although the registration register was destroyed and the ownership transfer registration was not made, even if the ownership transfer registration was not made, it shall not be deemed to lose its ownership ( even if the land of this case was purchased from the above Park Jong-man and the registration of ownership transfer was not made on or before June 21, 1949, the enforcement date of the Farmland Reform Act, the above land was continuously cultivated at that time, and since the land of this case was recognized as farmland subject to distribution even after the enforcement date of the Farmland Reform Act, the ownership transfer registration was not completely acquired without the registration under the Farmland Reform Act, and the person who purchased the farmland of this case without the ownership of this case can not be held as the owner of the above farmland before it was sold to another person without the ownership transfer registration under the Farmland Reform Act.

Therefore, the registration of transfer of ownership for the reason of inheritance in the name of Park Byung-ok, which was completed as to the land of this case, is deemed null and void without any reason. The registration of transfer of ownership is null and void, and each registration of transfer of ownership in the order entered in the name of the defendants, which was completed successively due to the above invalid registration, shall be deemed null and void. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs, who purchased the land of this case from the above Gyeong-bong, shall have the right to claim the registration of transfer of ownership for the above sale of the land in the order of the above Gyeong-chul, which is the heir of the property of the above Gyeong-bong, and the plaintiffs, who purchased the land of this case from the above Gyeong-bong, shall be deemed to have the right to claim the registration of cancellation of each transfer of ownership in the name of the defendants for the purpose of preserving the above right to claim the registration of transfer of ownership.

2. However, it is difficult to accept the fact-finding and determination by the lower court as they are.

A. First of all, the court below's fact-finding that on May 12, 1950 with respect to the land of this case, the registration of ownership transfer was completed under the name of the Hawon for the reason of the above sale as No. 3107, which was received on May 12, 1950 by the Seoul District District Court Incheon District Court's registry office, and thereafter, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of the above sale. Since the registration of the land of this case was destroyed and lost, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the restoration of the land of this case, without restoring the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Hawon, and on February 5, 1976, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on June 28, 1957 under the name of the head of the above Park Jong-ok, the head of the above Park Jong-cheon, which was adopted by the court below, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Nevertheless, the court below acknowledged the above facts only with the evidence adopted, and found the above facts as follows. The court below erred in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence in finding the remaining judgment which found the facts against the rules of evidence that it did not lose ownership even if the register was destroyed or lost and the register was not completed for the recovery of ownership transfer registration.

B. Furthermore, if farmland was purchased and cultivated before the enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act, and was excluded from the farmland subject to general distribution even at the time of enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act, the purchaser of the farmland fully acquired the ownership of the said farmland without the registration under the Farmland Reform Act. On the other hand, even if the seller or his heir did not own the ownership on the registry at the time of enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act, the purchaser did not complete the registration by December 31, 1965 pursuant to Article 10 of the Addenda of the Civil Act. Thus, it is difficult for the court below to find that the purchaser would lose its ownership or the seller’s heir did not complete the registration by December 31, 1965 (see Supreme Court Decision 72Da578, Jun. 13, 197; Supreme Court Decision 73Da1434, Jun. 11, 1974; Supreme Court Decision 9Da1984, May 28, 198).

C. Therefore, without examining the remaining grounds of appeal, the judgment of the court below cannot avoid reversal.

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Im-soo (Presiding Justice)