Effects of imposition of the restriction on the investment of real estate imposed on a state-owned river subject to the River Act;

For state-owned rivers subject to the River Act, a disposition imposing the real estate speculation suppression tax on the land category on the public register is a dry field is null and void as the defects are significant and apparent.

Attorney Lee Dong-sik et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant

The head of Sung-dong Tax Office shall appoint two litigation performers Kim Yang-won et al.

Seoul High Court Decision 73Gu246 delivered on December 4, 1974

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The defendant litigant's grounds of appeal are examined.

The court below held that the land at issue in this case (Seoul Seongdong-dong 237-1, 1,361) is a state-owned river pursuant to Article 3 of the River Act, since the land at issue in this case (Seoul Seongdong-dong 237-1, 1, 361) is announced as a river from the Japanese colonial point of view even if the land category at public register is transferred to a river, and since the name and section was designated as a river pursuant to the Presidential Decree No. 2, 6 December 1965. This recognition of the court below is just, and as such, the disposition of this case against the land for which the defendant is unable to impose the restriction on real estate speculation is significant and obvious. The judgment of the court below is without merit, and the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing judge. This decision is delivered with the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Han-jin (Presiding Justice)