Cases of misunderstanding Article 34 of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to Jurisdiction;

A lessee or custodian of any property devolving upon the State shall not be able to dispose of such property, such as the sale of the property devolving upon the Government.

Article 34 of the Act on Asset Disposal for Reversion

Supreme Court Decision 67Da651 Decided July 4, 1967

Plaintiff

Korea

Seoul High Court Decision 66Na1078 delivered on December 23, 1966

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

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

In its reasoning explanation, the non-party who was the administrator of the main real estate, which is the property devolving upon the plaintiff, entered into a sales contract on April 13, 1950 for the main building between the plaintiff and the non-party with the approval of the disposition of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Mayor and the director of the temporary bureau, and 634,200 won for the main building (the current currency) and 48,600 won for the main building, and the defendant's country is obligated to implement each procedure for the registration of transfer of ownership against the plaintiff by this sale. However, according to Article 34 of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to the defendant, the tenant or manager of the property devolving upon the plaintiff shall not be required to sublease or dispose of the property without the government's approval, and if the government's approval has been granted, it is reasonable to interpret that the tenant or manager of the property devolving upon the property to be valid for the sale, etc. (see Supreme Court Decision 67Da6517, Jul. 4, 1957).

This case is remanded to the Seoul High Court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Marins (Presiding Justice)