The meaning of the time when there is no military necessity under Article 20 of the Act on Special Measures for Readjustment of Requisitioned Property and the criteria for judgment thereof.

When there is no need for military affairs under Article 20 of the Act on Special Measures for the Adjustment of Requisitioned Property, the issue is not limited to whether the pertinent requisitioned property at issue has been stationed by a specific military unit or has been maintained and bound by the actual state of possession, but it is determined according to the tension that the military has to continue to use in accordance with the concept of high-level modernized operations. Since the above continuous use is correct to include indirect possession other than direct possession, it means the time when the military tension in the military that the military should continue to use is extinguished when it becomes no longer necessary for military purposes.

Article 20 of the Act on Special Measures for Readjustment of Requisitioned Property

Supreme Court Decision 89Meu9675 Decided December 12, 1989

Kim head of Sil-kak, Counsel for defendant-appellant

Korea

Busan District Court Decision 90Na6160 delivered on November 30, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

As to the Grounds of Appeal

The court below's finding that all of the land of this case was located within the territory of the military and is actually used until the date of the completion of pleadings in the court below as the purpose of its use does not err in the misunderstanding of evidence preparation for this fact-finding, and it cannot be viewed that there is no violation of the rules of evidence selection such as theory

In addition, when there is no need for military affairs as stipulated under Article 20 of the Act on Special Measures for the Adjustment of Requisitioned Property, the issue should be determined not only by whether the pertinent requisitioned property is stationed by a specific military unit or has been bound to maintain the actual state of possession, but also by the tension that the military should continue to use in line with the concept of highly modernized operations. Since it is reasonable to deem that the above continuous use is a concept that includes indirect possession, other than direct possession, it is reasonable to deem that the above mentioned use is a concept that includes indirect possession, and therefore, the writing at the time when the military necessity as seen above is extinguished.

Therefore, the court below's decision that the land of this case does not fall under the time when the military necessity under the above provision of this Act is no longer possible, is justified in light of the above legal principles, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as seen above, or by omitting any error or decision that has failed to conduct

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed for the reason that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)