With respect to the sale of farmland accompanied by the actual delivery prior to the completion of the redemption, the validity of the said sale where the seller ratified it after the completion of the redemption.

If the seller sells the land prior to the completion of the redemption and the buyer acquired the land prior to the completion of the redemption under the Farmland Reform Act, and the seller later completed the redemption in full, and the seller issued a certificate of transfer stating that he/she transferred the right to the property attached to the above land to his/her son, thereby allowing the above son to complete the registration of ownership transfer under the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Transfer of Ownership of Distributed Farmland, if the seller allows the above son to complete the registration of ownership transfer under the same Act, he/she may be deemed to have prepared and delivered the above document with the knowledge that the act of selling the land prior to the completion of the redemption is null and void at the time of preparation and delivery of the above document, and therefore, it shall be deemed that the seller done

Article 16 of the Farmland Reform Act, Article 139 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Defendant

Daejeon District Court Decision 66Na340 delivered on January 18, 1967

We reverse the original judgment.

The case shall be remanded to the Daejeon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal No. 1 are examined.

According to the facts duly established by the court below, since the land of this case was distributed to the plaintiff by the original farmland reform law, and the remaining amount of redemption until the time of sale to the non-party 1, 1951.2.10, which was the transfer of this case's land before the completion of its redemption, was delivered to the non-party 2 for the same non-party 1, and the non-party 1, who was delivered to the non-party 2 before the completion of the sale of this case's land, was delivered to the non-party 3 on the non-party 1, 1957, and the non-party 2 was delivered to the non-party 4, which was the non-party 1, the non-party 1, who was the non-party 4's transfer of this case's land, and the non-party 1, who was the non-party 9's transfer of this case's land, was not the non-party 5's transfer of this case's land to the non-party 2.

Therefore, in order to reverse the original judgment and to have the original judgment re-examine and determine, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Supreme Court Judge Do-dong (Presiding Judge) Do-dong (Presiding Justice) Do-man Do-man