Actual possession of the building reverted to the State and acquisition of goodwill;

(a) An annual interest in any property devolving upon the State shall not be naturally succeeded to the annual interest as a transfer of possession of the property devolving upon the State unless the approval of the State is given by the State;

(b) It cannot be recognized that the right can only be established with the mere de facto possession of the property devolving upon the State.

Articles 15 and 29 of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to Jurisdiction

Kim Jong-ju

The Director General of the Seoul Metropolitan Government

Seoul High Court Decision 61Na102 delivered on August 21, 1961

We reverse the original judgment.

This case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2, only the person who has the right to annual interest on the property may be the leased or purchased (only the person who has the right to annual interest on the property even if the person has not been the relative). It is the purport of the previous precedents that the right to annual interest cannot be recognized only by the mere possession of the government-owned property and the lease contract. According to the original judgment, the court below acknowledged the fact that the plaintiff occupied part of the building of this case, which is the property to which the plaintiff belongs, was in a pro rata relationship with the deceased's will, and that the plaintiff was responsible for funeral expenses due to the death of the above prostitution, the plaintiff must be protected in light of the circumstances, and therefore, the court below did not recognize that the right to annual interest on the property to which the plaintiff belongs is not a right to annual interest on the property to which the plaintiff belongs, unless there is any special circumstance to recognize that the right to annual interest on the property is not a right to annual interest on the property to which the plaintiff belongs as a matter of course, and it cannot be viewed that the court below did not recognize that the right to annual interest on the property.

Therefore, the decision of the court below is delivered with the assent of all participating judges in order to make a new trial and determination.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Mag-Mag-man (Presiding Judge)