logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 제주지방법원 2013.12.19 2013노381
재물손괴
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The purport of the grounds for appeal is G not the defendant but the tenant, and since the sum of the Dongbane in the Civil Act is owned by C, the defendant who is the landowner, is delegated with the comprehensive management right by C, the crime of causing property damage cannot be established.

2. Determination:

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant, who manages the land D and E owned by C (hereinafter “instant land”), was in office from the lessee G, etc., and was aware that the victim F is planting wild white trees, etc. on the said land. On October 2011, the Defendant demanded the victim to find out the said land to be transferred from the said land to another place, but the victim did not comply with the request.

At around 08:00 on April 4, 2012, the Defendant: (a) ordered H to know of the fact on the land where it was planted by the victim in Seopopo City D and E; (b) destroyed the Defendant’s land where it was planted; and (c) ordered Y to load 21g of wild Eastern trees owned by the victim in 30-40 on the market price of the victim’s land, the Defendant destroyed the Defendant’s land where it was planted.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

C. Article 256 of the Civil Act provides, “The owner of an immovable shall acquire the ownership of an article attached to the real estate. However, this shall not apply to an article attached by the title of another person.” The term “right holder” under the proviso above refers to the right to use the movable property by attaching it to another person’s movable property, such as superficies, chonsegwon, lease of lease, etc.

As such, if a person without such title has planted trees on the real estate with the consent of the lessee without the consent of the owner of the land, barring any special circumstance, the owner of the land may not claim the ownership of the trees.

Supreme Court Decision 198Da1448 delivered on July 11, 1989

arrow