If the registration of ownership transfer has been made due to the completion of repayment after the disposition of distributing the orchard to the general farmland at the time of the enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act, the right to claim the cancellation of the registration of the owner of the orchard.

Even if a transfer registration of ownership has been made due to the completion of repayment after the disposition of distributing an orchard into general farmland at the time of the enforcement of the Farmland Reform Act, the owner of the previous orchard may request the cancellation of the above registration which is null and void of the cause.

Article 5 of the Farmland Reform Act, Article 7(3) of the Farmland Reform Act, Article 21 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Article 176 of the Gu Residents Act

Lee Dong-seop

United Kingdom of Justice

Seoul High Court Decision 62Na566 delivered on September 27, 1963, Seoul High Court Decision 62Na566 delivered on September 27, 1963

the original judgment shall be reversed.

The case shall be remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Civil District Court.

The gist of the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal No. 1 is that the Plaintiff was the owner of the orchard at the time when the Farmland Reform Act was implemented, and thus, it should be put up for a public auction by bidding pursuant to Article 7(3) of the Farmland Reform Act and Article 21(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. If so, the Plaintiff has the right to expect the purchase of orchard as the purchaser of the second priority under Article 21(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the above Act, and if the public auction disposition is made under the above Act and subordinate statutes, it would be much higher than the ordinary farmland, so even if the Plaintiff did not acquire ownership, it would have the right to receive a more compensation than

In this case, in order to protect the above interests of the plaintiff as a general farmland, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the interest in the lawsuit that denied the right to cancel the registration of cancellation, despite the fact that the plaintiff should have to recognize the right to cancel the registration of cancellation of the land ownership registration based on the ground that the plaintiff's above interests are invalid.

In light of the original judgment, since the above orchard was owned by the plaintiff at the time of the implementation of the Farmland Reform Act, and since the farmland distribution procedure was established in accordance with the general farmland distribution procedure at the time of the implementation of the Farmland Reform Act to the defendant, who was the administrator of the orchard, and the completion of repayment thereafter was confirmed by the original judgment, and the distribution procedure of orchard should be distributed in accordance with the procedure different from general farmland distribution under the Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Reform Act, as pointed out in the argument in the appeal, although the above distribution procedure should be determined as void as a matter of law, and even if the above distribution disposition becomes invalid as a matter of law, as long as the land was purchased by the State as a matter of course pursuant to Article 5 of the Farmland Reform Act, it is clear that the plaintiff was disqualified from its ownership transfer registration as to the land so long as the right to claim for the cancellation of ownership transfer registration is no longer likely to cause the plaintiff's right to claim the cancellation of ownership transfer registration under the name of the plaintiff to the third party without the plaintiff's consent to claim the cancellation of ownership transfer registration under the name of the real estate.

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench, who did not decide on the remaining grounds of appeal and did not decide on it again.

Justices Han Sung-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court