logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1970. 9. 29. 선고 70다1593 판결
[소유권이전등기말소][집18(3)민,141]
Main Issues

Whether or not the administrative decision of cancellation of reversion without obtaining the confirmation of the Minister of Justice under Article 2 (1) of the Act No. 120 and the substantive rights are lost.

Summary of Judgment

If the administrative decision of the Central Government Officers was rendered but the Minister of Justice did not obtain confirmation from him/her under this Act, he/she would lose the substantive rights.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 2(1) of the Act No. 120, Article 86 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff-Appellant

Korea

Defendant-Appellee

Defendant 1 and one other

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 69Na2254 delivered on June 16, 1970, Seoul High Court Decision 69Na2254 delivered on July 16, 1970

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The court below's rejection of the plaintiff's claim to the effect that even though the non-party was subject to the administrative decision of the Central Government Agency's cancellation of attribution of the real estate at issue in this case, it did not obtain confirmation from the Minister of Justice under Article 120 of the Act, and that the confirmation is not made, and thus it does not lose the substantive rights, is just, and there is no error of misapprehending the legal principles of the theory of lawsuit

With respect to the second ground:

Although the fact that the defendant's electrical date was paid to the court in April 10, 700, the fact that the attorney Lee Jong-soo was paid to the plaintiff is apparent in the record, the fact that the plaintiff was notified is not peeped, it cannot be viewed that the representative's authority still exists on the date of pleading on May 22, 700, where the sub-agent Lee Jong-soo present at the court. Thus, there was no violation of law in the court below's holding the date, and it is not a way to hire the plaintiff on the premise that the attorney's power of attorney was extinguished.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Marins (Presiding Judge) of the Republic of Korea

arrow