(a) Validity of the sales agreement which makes the lease right of the former lessee due to the defect in the site to which the ownership belongs, effective;

(b) Where a lessee of the site to which he belongs leases part of the building constructed on the site with the approval of the host country, or illegal sublease of the site;

A. The previous defect does not affect the validity of the above sales contract if the sales contract for property devolving upon the defective right of lease under the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to Ownership is concluded.

B. A lessee of a site devolving upon the approval of a host country leases part of the building constructed with the approval of the host country to another party, and it does not necessarily constitute an illegal lease of the site.

Article 34 of the Act on Asset Disposal for Reversion

Man Senior Civil Service

Director General of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Government

Domination

Seoul High Court Decision 58Da55 delivered on September 18, 1958

On the ground of the judgment of the court below, it is hard to acknowledge that the non-party 1 was the non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 3's non-party 1's non-party 5's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 3's non-party 1's non-party 5's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 5's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 3's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 3's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 3's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 3's non-party 1'

Therefore, it is clear that the sales contract between the original defendant and the original defendant is due to the right of lease on the part of the main office of the non-party 1 who is disqualified on the part of the original building, so the plaintiff's sales contract cannot be seen as a decent person under the Act on the Disposal of Property to Which the original property belongs, and the plaintiff's claim for the principal office under the premise that the right of lease is acquired shall be dismissed. However, even if the sales contract between the original defendant and the original defendant is based on the defective right of lease, it is difficult to view that the original office of the non-party 1 had a right of lease under the Act on the Disposal of Property to which the original owner's own property belongs, even if the original office of the non-party 1 had a legitimate right of lease on the part of the original building and the original office of the non-party 1, 1955, the original office of the non-party 1, which had no legal effect on the establishment of the original office and the original office of the non-party 1, which had no legal effect on the original office's decision.

Justices Jeon Soo-tae (Presiding Justice)