The nature of the legal relations by which the Government grain was lent to local governments and ownership of such grain;

Since the legal relationship that the Government of the Republic of Korea has lent grain to a local self-government organization belongs to the relationship of a loan for consumption, the ownership of the above grain belongs to the Government of the Republic of Korea and was an organization of local autonomy, so even though the head of the local government has disposed of it on different occasions, he is only liable for damages to the above local self-government

Civil Code Article 598

Korean Successors of the Republic of Korea:

Defendant

Gwangju District Court Decision 61Na638 delivered on February 28, 1962

The appeal shall be dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

According to Gap's evidence Nos. 1-2, 3 (Grain Repayment Deed), where the original judgment is not rejected, the legal nature of the legal relationship with the government of the Republic of Korea lending the grain to the North west-gun in 1955 should be deemed to belong to the loan contract for consumption. Therefore, even if the defendant disposes of the grain in this case, as recognized by the original judgment, it shall not be said that the defendant is liable for damages to the North west-gun, the owner of the grain, and the government of the Republic of Korea shall not be held liable for such damages. However, the original judgment is just for the reason to reject the main claim of the Government of the Republic of Korea, and it cannot be acknowledged that the defendant sold or disposed of the grain in kind with the personal qualification of the Government of the Republic of Korea, and the defendant cannot be viewed as being liable for damages to the defendant as the owner of the grain, and the defendant cannot be viewed as the owner of the grain in this case's own opinion that he did not request the return of the grain in kind to the defendant as the head of the local government of the Republic of Korea.

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed without merit. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Cho Jin-man (Presiding Judge) and Lee Jong-man (Presiding Justice)