208Guhap7328 Revocation of a decision on reversion to the State

○○ Co., Ltd.

Investigation Committee on Pro-Japanese Collaborative Property

May 26, 2009

June 25, 2009

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The defendant's decision on November 22, 2007 to revert the pro-Japanese Property to Korea (No. 103 of 2007) on real estate owned by the non-party (attached Form 1) as indicated in the list shall be revoked.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The deceased ○○○○ (hereinafter referred to as the “instant land”) acquired each parcel of land prior to the division and conversion of the real estate listed in the [Attachment 1] list from September 30, 1917 to January 6, 1919, between September 30, 1917 and January 6, 1919.

B. The instant land was inherited to the Nonparty after the death of ○○○○, and the registration of transfer of the Nonparty’s ownership was completed between January 15, 1962 and February 17, 1998 with respect to the instant land.

C. The plaintiff is a company that implements a housing reconstruction project on April 15, 2004, under the name of 200,000,000,000,000,000 won (hereinafter referred to as "00,000,000,000 won; 60,000,000 won; 60,000,000 won; 5,000,000 won; 6,000,000 won; 6,000,000 won; 6,000,000 won; 6,000,000 won; 6,000 won; 6,000,000 won; 6,000 won; 6,000,000 won; 6,000,000 won; and 2,5,000,00 won; and

D. On December 8, 2006, the Defendant: (a) decided to commence an investigation on the instant land pursuant to Article 19(1) of the Special Act on the Reversion of Property Pro-Japanese Collaborative to the State (hereinafter “Special Act”); and (b) pursuant to Article 19(1) of the Act on the Reversion of Property Pro-Japanese and Anti-National Collaborative to the State, on the ground that “the instant land was acquired by ○○○, a pro-Japanese Collaborative to the Anti-National Collaborative to the State; (c) on November 22, 2007, “the ○○○○” was a person who committed an act under Article 2 subparag. 7 of the Special Act on the Finding of Anti-National Collaborative to the Republic of Korea, and constitutes an anti-National Collaborative to the State under Article 2 subparag. 1(a) of the Special Act; and (d) on the ground that the instant land constitutes a person who cooperates with the State under Article 2 subparag. 1(2) of the Special Act on the date of its acquisition.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 3, 4, Gap 7-1 to 22, Gap 11-1, 2, Eul 1-1, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's assertion

For the following reasons, the Defendant’s disposition of this case is unlawful.

(1) The instant land is not an asset acquired by ○○○ in exchange for cooperation with the Japanese colonialism, but an asset inherited by ○○○○ from the fleet, and a success for the management of the cemetery base, such as the ○○ Military, etc., which was inherited from the fleet, and the Defendant disposed of the instant land on a different premise.

(2) The Plaintiff is the purchaser who was not aware of the fact that the instant land was pro rata property at the time of acquiring the instant land from the Nonparty, but paid all reasonable prices under the instant sales contract. Although the Plaintiff was unable to complete the registration of ownership transfer under the Plaintiff’s name with respect to the instant land, the Plaintiff is also a third party protected pursuant to the proviso to Article 3(1) of the Special Act, considering that the Plaintiff paid the purchase price under the instant sales contract and occupied and used the instant land by taking over it from the Nonparty, and the legislative purpose under Article 1 of the Special Act is to protect the third party acting in good faith and ensure the safety of transaction.

(b) Related statutes;

[Attachment 2] The entry in the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes is as follows.

C. Determination

(1) As to the first argument

(A) Facts of recognition

1) The act of ○○○

가 ) ○○○은 ○○ 대원군의 ○○세 사손 ( 嗣孫 ) 으로서 , 1907 . 3 . 14 . ○○○으로 임 명되었고 , 1910 . 6 . 4 . 종2품 ○○○으로 봉해졌으며 , 1910 . 8 . 25 . ○○○에 올랐다 .

나 ) 일본제국주의는 한일합병 직후인 1910 . 8 . 29 . “ 일본국 황제폐하는 공훈 있는 한국인으로서 특히 표창에 적당하다고 인정된 자에게 영작을 수여하고 또 은급을 부여 한다 ” 고 규정된 한일합병조약문 제5조에 근거하여 황실령 제14호로 조선귀족령을 제 정 · 시행하였는데 , 조선귀족령 제2조는 “ 작 ( 爵 ) 은 이왕 ( 李王 ) 의 현재의 혈족으로서 황족 의 예우를 받지 않는 자와 문지 ( 地 ) 또는 공로가 있는 조선인에게 수여한다 ” 고 규정 하고 있다 .

C) On October 7, 1910, 000, ○○○ received the highest position from the Japanese colonialism under Article 2 of the Decree on Joseon Happiness, and received KRW 168,00 on January 13, 1911, and received KRW 168,00 on August 1, 1912, 191, on the ground that “A person has contributed to the previous one-day relationship.” On August 1, 1912, ○○ received the Korean colon, and continued to be elevated after being on December 5, 1912, and was elevated as of January 3, 1935, and was elevated as of August 15, 194.

D) On November 4, 1910, 1910, 000, ○○○ was a person who was, on behalf of the Shipbuilding, engaged in an audit on the award of commission to Japan on behalf of the Dominner. On December 25, 1910, ○○ was a person who was in charge of an auditor on the award of commission by visiting the Domindo governor, and on April 12, 1914, she was a person who was in charge of an auditor on the award of commission by visiting the Domindo governor.

E) From January 16, 1915, ○○○ served as the adviser of the office of the Samsongsan Association, an organization organized under the cooperation and support of Japanese colonialism. From February 21, 1917, 21, 1917, ○○ served as the adviser of the Buddhist Family Association, an organization established under the initiative of ○○○, etc.

F) On November 10, 1928, 00 ○○ participated in the border of the Cho Jong-dae, which was formed by the Japanese colonial rule, as a public figure actively cooperation with the colonial rule, from the Japanese colonial rule, he was awarded a shock and a substitute commemorative hall, from April 5, 1941 to the National Total Power Shipbuilding that was formed by the Japanese colonial rule. From October 22, 1941, 1941, the ○○○ participated in the national border of the Cho Jong-dae, which was formed by the Japanese colonial rule. On January 28, 1942, 194, the ○○ participated in the national defense donation collected from the Japanese colonial rule, which was in the capacity of the president of the Japanese colonial rule, and was in the position of the Japanese colonial rule-related public figure on May 30, 194, and was in the position of the Japanese colonial rule-related public project.

2) Records as to the success and the defendant's measures

가 ) 1855 . 11 . 19 . 자 일성록에는 ○○이 포천 선단리 일대를 ○○대원군의 묘소로 정하면서 그 묘역 관리를 위한 사패지의 범위를 “ 동으로는 구룡동 300보 ( 步 ) , 서로는 해룡천 300보 , 동서 합 600보 , 남으로는 선단산 300보 , 북으로는 응봉 300보 , 남북 합 600보 , 도합 주회 ( 周廻 ) 합 2 , 400보 ” 로 정한 것으로 기록되어 있고 , 1849 . 8 . 15 . 자 일 성록과 1906 . 10 . 7 . 자 국역승정원일기에는 ○○의 생모인 OOO의 묘역 관리를 위한 사패지의 범위에 관하여 “ 동으로는 능동리 , 서로는 범무지고개 , 남으로는 백련사동 입 구 , 북으로는 홍제원탄막 뒤 , 사면 각 300보 ” 라고 기록되어 있다 .

B) On June 15, 2007, based on the records of each of the above literature, the defendant recognized the land owned by the non-party located within 300 square meters around the cemetery of ○○ Man-gun and ○○○○○○○ (1 square meters = 120cm) as a plaque and revoked the decision to commence the investigation.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence 2, Eul evidence 3-1, 2, Eul evidence 5-7, Eul evidence 8-1 through 3, Eul evidence 9, 10, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

(B) According to the above facts, each of the instant lands is presumed as property acquired between September 6, 1910 and January 6, 1919 by ○○○, a pro-Japanese and anti-national actors, as property acquired in return for pro-Japanese activities pursuant to Article 2 Subparag. 2 of the Special Act, and all of the arguments are presented.

In light of the following circumstances, i.e., ① the Defendant, based on the literature records on June 15, 2007, acknowledged that the land owned by the Nonparty located within the 300th KOwon-gun and OOOO (1st = 120cm) was a plaque and revoked the decision to commence an investigation. Each of the instant land constitutes land outside the scope of a plaque based on literature records; ② ○○○○ was granted various rights of preference in return for pro-Japanese activities; ② The ownership of the land survey and the forest survey injury on the instant part of this case’s land at issue at the time of the Han-il merger can be deemed to have been carried out by the Defendant on the land improvement policy, i.e., the owner of the land survey and the forest survey injury led by the Japanese colonialism, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the land was less than 31 to 331 to 41, 31 to 32, and 341 to 31, respectively, of the instant land.

(C) Therefore, the first argument of the first plaintiff on a different premise is without merit.

(2) As to the second argument

(A) The main text of Article 3(1) of the Special Act provides that "The property of kind shall belong to the State at the time of the act of causing cause such as acquisition, donation, etc." and the effect of reversion to the State shall be limited only when the defendant's decision is made.

Since there is no provision that pro-Japanese property shall take place, it shall not be owned by the State at the expense of the defendant to make a decision on the reversion of the State, but the act of causing acquisition, donation, etc. by the enforcement of the Special Act.

It is naturally owned by the state retroactively to the city.

Meanwhile, Article 1 of the Special Act also provides for the legislative purpose of the Special Act to protect a third party acting in good faith and ensure the safety of transaction. Accordingly, the proviso of Article 3(1) of the Special Act provides that "no third party shall impair the right acquired in good faith or by paying a reasonable price," but the Special Act does not provide for separate provisions concerning the meaning of "right" and "right" in the proviso of Article 3(1).

(B) In light of the purport, contents, etc. of the above provisions, a third party, who is not affected by the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Special Act for transaction safety, refers to a person who, in principle, acquires a pro-Japanese property in good faith or by paying a fair price, and acquires a right thereto. Article 186 of the Civil Act of the Republic of Korea provides that the registration of acquisition and loss of real rights due to a juristic act on real estate has become effective, and that the registration, which is the method of public announcement in real rights, is not a requirement for establishing a requisite for establishment or taking effect. Therefore, in light of the relationship with the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Special Act, it is reasonable to deem that “the acquisitor” under the proviso of Article 3(1) of the Special Act, and where the object is real estate, the person shall have a registration, which is the method of public announcement. In addition, in light of the relationship with the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Special Act, the right referred to in the proviso of the Special Act means a right to claim against the owner of pro-Japanese property, and the right.

(C) According to the above facts, the Plaintiff was unable to complete the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the Plaintiff on the instant land. Thus, regardless of whether the Plaintiff is a pro-Japanese property or whether the purchase price under the instant sales contract is a legitimate price, the Plaintiff does not constitute an acquirer of pro-Japanese property protected under the proviso of Article 3(1) of the Special Act, and the Plaintiff’s intentional intent does not constitute a right protected under the proviso of Article 3(1) of the same Act, and the Plaintiff’s right to claim for transfer of ownership against the Nonparty does not constitute a right (the right to claim acquisition is not a pro-Japanese property right, but a right to claim a registration of transfer of ownership against the Nonparty by paying the purchase price under the instant sales contract in full, and is occupying and using the instant land after delivery from the Nonparty, or includes the protection of the third party or transaction safety for the legislative purpose of the Special Act.

(D) Accordingly, the plaintiff's second assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion

The defendant's disposition of this case is legitimate, and the plaintiff's claim is not accepted as it is without merit.

Judges ○○○○○

Judges OOO -

Judges 000

[Attachment 1] List of Real Estate (Omission)

[Attachment 2]

Related Acts and subordinate statutes

/ Special Act on the Reversion of Property of Pro-Japanese and Anti-National Collaborators to the State

Article 1 (Purpose)

The purpose of this Act is to realize justice, establish the national spirit immediately, and realize the constitutional ideology of the March 1, 200 campaign, which was resistanceed to the Japanese colonialism, by reverting to the State the property accumulated by pro-Japanese and anti-national acts at that time by those who cooperate with the colonial rule of the Japanese colonialism, and pressure our nation, and by protecting third parties in good faith, thereby contributing to the safety of transactions.

Article 2 (Definitions)

The definitions of terms used in this Act shall be as follows:

1. The term "pro-Japanese and anti-national actors to whom the property belongs to the State (hereinafter referred to as "pro-Japanese and anti-national actors")";

Any person who falls under any of the following items:

(a) Acts as referred to in subparagraphs 6 through 9 of Article 2 of the Special Act to Finding the Truth of Anti-National Acts under the Japanese colonial Rule;

a person (including a person of distinguished services and a person of distinguished services): Provided, That this shall not apply to a person who falls under subparagraph 9.

section 4, such as a person who refuses to act or actively participates in an independent movement after being returned;

Any person determined by the Investigation Committee on Property of Pro-Japanese Collaborators according to the politics shall be an exception.

(b) Pro-Japaneseism under Article 2 of the Special Act to Finding the Truth of Anti-National Acts under the Rule of Japanese Occupation;

Pursuant to the decision of the Investigation Committee on Pro-Japanese Collaborative Property under Article 4 among the persons above;

A person who has participated in a non-permanent or anti-Japanese movement and his/her family members shall be killed, wounded, abused, or arrested, or arrested;

A person whose degree of friendship, such as a person who instructed or ordered, is deemed to be significantly serious;

2. The term "property of pro-Japanese and anti-national actors (hereinafter referred to as the "property of pro-Japanese")" means the right of the State by the pro-Japanese and anti-national actors;

The cost of cooperation with the Japanese colonialism from the opening of the War of Russia to August 15, 1945.

property acquired as such or inherited, or received as a gift of a legacy knowing that it is a property of inheritance or friendly property;

means the acquisition by an anti-national act from the opening of the war of Russ and the Japanese War to August 15, 1945.

Property shall be presumed to be property acquired in return for the act of friendship.

Article 3 (Reversion, etc. of Parental Property to the State)

(1) Pro-Japanese property (use, possession, or management by foreign embassies or armed forces in accordance with international conventions, agreements, etc.)

property, including property used, possessed, or managed by the State among property of pro-Japanese and pro-Japanese;

C) An acquisition, gift, or any other cause of action shall be owned by the State, however, in good faith.

or any right acquired by paying a reasonable price shall not be prejudiced.

Article 4 (Establishment of Investigation Committee on Property of Pro-Japanese Collaborators)

In order to deliberate on and resolve matters concerning the investigation, management, etc. of pro-Japanese property, the Investigation Committee on Pro-Japanese Property for Pro-Japanese (hereinafter referred to as the "Committee") shall be established under the jurisdiction of the President.

Article 5 (Duties, etc. of Committee)

(1) The duties of the Committee shall be as follows:

1. Investigation and selection of pro-Japanese and anti-national actors;

2. Investigation of property and determination of whether pro-Japanese property is performed by persons who commit pro-Japanese and anti-national acts;

(2) The Commission shall carry out the affairs referred to in the provisions of paragraph (1) above, such as State agencies, local governments and other officers

A training institution or organization may request cooperation, such as submission of necessary materials and fact-finding.

Article 19 (Commencement, etc. of Investigation)

(1) The Commission shall, when there are reasonable grounds to recognize that a person constitutes friendly property, pass resolution on such grounds.

Necessary investigations shall be commenced concerning the ownership of property, the status of property of pro-Japanese and anti-national actors, etc.

shall file an application for preservative measures with the court. In such cases, the Commission shall apply for such measures.

Article 23 (Notice of Decision, etc.)

(1) The Committee shall decide on the reversion of the property to the State on the grounds of pro-Japanese property pursuant to Article 7.

In such cases, the person who manages and owns the subject property shall be notified of such fact.

(2) Any person who has an objection against a resolution under paragraph (1) may file an administrative appeal or administrative litigation.

(2).

Special Act on Finding the Truth of Anti-National Acts under the Japanese colonial Rule;

Article 2 (Definitions)

For the purpose of this Act, the term "friendly and anti-national acts" means acts falling under any of the following subparagraphs, which have been performed from the opening of the Japanese War to August 15, 1945, from the commencement of the seizure of national sovereignty by the Japanese colonialism:

7. The act of receiving or succeeding to the act by the contribution of the merger between Korea and Japan; and