Effect of distribution of farmland to reserved land for replotting

Before the designation of a land to be reserved for replotting has been taken, if the farmland was distributed to the cultivated land (hereinafter referred to as "A") after the designation of the land to be reserved for replotting has been taken, while the land was cultivated by the owner of the land A with the right to cultivate, and the land became final and conclusive again, the consignee shall lose the ownership of the previous land (hereinafter referred to as "A") allocated and transfer the ownership to the new land (hereinafter referred to as "B") by the

Article 62 of the Land Readjustment Projects Act

Supreme Court Decision 67Da914 Decided December 24, 1968 Supreme Court Decision 69Da13 Decided February 25, 1969

[Defendant-Appellant] Plaintiff 1

Defendant Kim Jong-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 75Na2982 delivered on May 17, 197

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

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the original judgment, the lower court: (a) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on the land of the same 477 square meters, 188-2; (b) 188-2; (c) 188-3; and (d) 204 square meters prior to April 188; (b) 88-10; and (c) 203 square meters prior to 188; and (d) 203 square meters prior to September 7, 1942; and (c) registered the land of five parcels prior to 189 to 4; and (d) obtained ownership transfer registration of the land of the Plaintiff on the land of the same 197-6-4; and (d) obtained ownership transfer registration of the land of the same 6-1,65-2; and (e) obtained ownership transfer registration of the land of the Plaintiff on the land of the same 6-1,67-1,000 square meters prior to the completion of the land substitution plan.

However, if the above land as a result of the land readjustment project is owned by Gap and Eul, and if the above land is owned by the owner of the previous land to be reserved for use and profit-making, the land can be acquired only as to the land which he cultivated (B) and the land to be reserved for use and profit-making can be acquired for the land to be reserved for use and profit-making (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 63Da14, Feb. 28, 1963; Supreme Court Decision 65Da274, Jun. 29, 1967; Supreme Court Decision 97Da1664, Jun. 26, 197). If the above land was disposed of for use and profit-making by the non-party 1 with the above land to be reserved for use and profit-making (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 90Da1475, Jun. 28, 196).

Therefore, without examining the defendant's other grounds of appeal, the original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Min Jae-chul (Presiding Justice)