[1] In a case where a Korean person purchased a property owned by Japan as of August 9, 1945 and acquired its ownership before it, but did not receive the cancellation of its ownership, the subject of ownership (=the State)

[2] Whether a forest that is not indicated as a state-owned forest register’s right presumption and a forest that is not indicated as a property devolving upon it can be determined to be not a Japanese ownership as of August 9, 1945 (negative)

[1] Property in the name of Japan as of August 9, 1945 under the name of Japan becomes property devolved to the Government of the Republic of Korea under Article 5 of the first Agreement on Finance and Property concluded between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of the United States of America, since the property acquired by the Government of the United States of America as of August 9, 194 under Article 33 of the Act of the United States of America, even if a Korean person had already acquired ownership due to purchase or any other cause from a Japanese person before home, the ownership can not be claimed to the State unless it is confirmed by the adjudication on the cancellation of attribution or the decision on the cancellation of attribution by the adjudication on the cancellation of attribution by the Committee on Appeal under the Ordinance of the Prime Minister of the United States of America on July 28, 1948, or is confirmed by Article 102 and 230 of the Act, or is subject to the cancellation of attribution by a final judgment from the court.

[2] The forest ledger, based on which the ownership of the forest land across the country was created by putting them in the forest ledger before the destruction due to the incident of June 25, 1952. Based on this, a nationalization decision was made on July 26, 1952. The entry of the forest land in the forest ledger, the ownership of the forest land, the ownership of the ownership of the forest land, the ownership of the ownership of the forest land, and the maintenance work of the state-owned forest ledger is carried out through consultation with the Financial Services and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. As such, the state-owned forest ledger was eventually carried out in the forest ledger before the destruction due to the incident of June 25, 195. Therefore, the ownership presumption power granted to the owner column in the forest ledger leads to the state-owned forest ledger, and it is reasonable to view that the forest land recorded in the state-owned forest ledger as property belonging to Japan as of August 9, 1945, which is not the ownership of the forest land in the Japanese forest ledger, but not its ownership.

[1] Article 5 of the first Agreement on Finance and Property concluded between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of the United States of America / [2] Article 186 of the Civil Act, the former Land Conservation Rules (Ordinance of the Ministry of Government Administration and Home Affairs No. 45 of April 25, 1914), the former Rules of the Forestry Register (Rules of the Ministry of Shipbuilding No. 113 of August 23, 19

[2] Supreme Court Decision 92Da12216 delivered on June 26, 1992 (Gong1992, 2275) Supreme Court Decision 95Da12125 delivered on May 26, 1995 (Gong195Ha, 2263)

Korea

Defendant 1 and two others (Attorney Park Jong-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 95Na44575 delivered on June 27, 1996

All appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

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

1. According to the records, the court below's rejection of the defendants' assertion that the non-party 1, the father of the defendant 1, purchased the real estate of this case from the non-party 2, Japan, the original owner of the real estate of this case, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in its name in 1943, and because the register was destroyed due to the 6.25 incidents, it cannot be deemed as the property belonging to the real estate of this case, is just and reasonable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, the contradiction of reasons, and the lack of reasons, etc.

2. The property under the name of Japan as of August 9, 1945 becomes the property devolving upon the Government of the Republic of Korea under Article 5 of the first Agreement on Finance and Property concluded between the Government of the Republic of Korea and the Government of the United States of America after acquiring the property under the name of Japan as of August 3, 194 under Article 33 of the Act of the United States of America. Thus, even if Korea had already acquired the ownership from Japan before its home, it shall be within the prescribed period of time, on the ground that it had already been purchased from Japan, and there was no special dispute between the two parties as to the above real property under the name of the court of the Republic of Korea and the registration of ownership preservation under the name of the above 4th of April 17, 1948, the adjudication on the cancellation of reversion or the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration under the name of the court of law No. 102 and No. 230, or the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant 2, the above real property was owned by the court below.

The decision of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the violation of the rules of evidence, incomplete deliberation, lack of reasons, contradiction of reasons, property devolving upon the original state, etc.

3. The forest register, based on the previous forest register before the destruction due to the six and twenty-five incident, in which the national forest register was created, and based on which the nationalization decision was made on July 26, 1952. The forest land register was recorded in the original forest register, the original state-owned property-owned forest register, the original state-owned forest register, the original state-owned forest register, the original state-owned forest register through consultation with the Ministry of Finance and Agriculture, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, and the maintenance work of the original state-owned forest register was performed. As such, the state-owned forest register was conducted based on the past state-owned forest register before the destruction due to the incident. Accordingly, the presumption of rights granted in the owner column in the above forest register can be said to have been transferred to the above state-owned forest register. Thus, the forest land recorded in the state-owned forest ledger as property belonging to the state-owned forest register as of August 9, 194, and it is not reasonable to conclude that it is currently owned by Japan-owned forest property.

The decision of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the grounds for the theory of lawsuit, inconsistent reasoning, and vested property, and the decision of the court below on June 26, 1992 by the party members pointing out the theory of lawsuit 92Da12216 is reasonable to regard the forest land recorded in the forest land ledger as owned by Japan at the time of August 9, 1945. Thus, the decision of the court below is not inconsistent with the above decision of the party members. The argument is without merit.

4. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Chang-tae (Presiding Justice)