[1] In a case where the qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland is not attached to an application for registration of land which is farmland, whether the registrar should reject the application (affirmative in principle)

[2] Standard of determining whether farmland falls under the farmland stipulated in the Farmland Act, and method of applying for registration where the actual status of the land does not fall under the farmland stipulated in Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Farmland Act

[3] In a case where Gap filed an application for ownership transfer registration of real estate, the land category of which on the public record is the previous or the answer and submitted a reply to fact-finding on the land status of the head of Eup/Myeon on behalf of the qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland to the effect that the above real estate is not farmland, the case holding that the above real estate does not constitute farmland regardless of its land category, and that the above reply does not constitute "written proving that it is not farmland"

[4] Whether the provisions on the qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland under Article 8 of the Farmland Act apply to farmland within a green area among urban areas designated under the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act, which is not necessary for an urban planning facility project (affirmative)

[1] Article 8(1) of the Farmland Act, Article 5 subparag. 8 (see current Article 29 subparag. 9) of the former Registration of Real Estate Act (wholly amended by Act No. 10580, Apr. 12, 2011) / [2] Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 8(1) of the Farmland Act, Article 5 subparag. 8 (see current Article 29 subparag. 9) of the former Registration of Real Estate Act (wholly amended by Act No. 10580, Apr. 12, 201) / [3] Article 2 subparag. 1 and Article 8(1) of the Farmland Act, Article 5 subparag. 8 (see current Article 29 subparag. 9) of the former Registration of Real Estate Act (wholly amended by Act No. 10580, Apr. 12, 201) / [4] Article 8 of the Farmland Act, Article 8 of the former Registration of Real Estate Act (wholly amended by Act No. 30519, Apr. 19, 2019)

[1] Supreme Court Order 2001Ma1235 dated October 28, 2002 (Gong2003Sang, 134) / [2] Supreme Court Order 98Ma2604 dated February 23, 199 (Gong199Sang, 827)

Masung Housing Industry Corporation

Daegu District Court Order 2011Ra499 dated February 7, 2012

The reappeal is dismissed.

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

1. As to the ground for reappeal concerning the document attesting that it is not farmland under the Farmland Act

According to Article 8(1) of the Farmland Act, a person who intends to acquire farmland shall obtain a qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland from the head of a Si/Gu/Eup/Myeon having jurisdiction over the location of the farmland, and Article 5 subparag. 8 of the former Registration of Real Estate Act (wholly amended by Act No. 10580, Apr. 12, 201) provides that where documents or drawings necessary for an application for registration are not attached, the registrar shall dismiss the application unless the correction is made on the same day, and the registrar has the authority to formally examine whether the requirements for registration are met by the application and its attached documents and the register (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 201Ma1235, Oct. 28, 2002); where land category is not attached to the application for registration of land, the registrar shall reject the application in principle.

However, the issue of which land is provided for in the Farmland Act shall be determined depending on the actual state of the land. However, even if the land whose land category is the previous or annexed land on the public register is changed, if the change is temporary, and if it can easily restore the land to the original state, the land still constitutes farmland as provided for in the Farmland Act (see Supreme Court Order 98Ma2604, Feb. 23, 199). Therefore, if the actual state of the land does not fall under farmland as provided for in Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Farmland Act, an application for registration may be filed without attaching the qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland, along with a document issued by the head of Si/Gu/Eup/Myeon which proves that the land is not farmland, the reason that the land does not fall under farmland as provided for in the Farmland Act should be specified in the document proving that it is not farmland.

According to the records, the re-appellant filed an application for the ownership transfer registration of each real estate of this case, the land category of which in the public record is the former or the answer, and submitted a reply to the fact-finding on the land status of the non-farmland-Dong-dong Eup on behalf of the qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland on behalf of the non-farmland-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si. In that case, the fact that the current status of each real estate of this case is miscellaneous and is not a farmland regardless of the land category, and that there is no specific reason for the change of the status of each real estate of this case, and thus, it cannot be determined whether each of the real estate of this case constitutes farmland under the aforementioned legal principles. Thus, the above time does not err in the misapprehension of legal principles on “written”

2. As to the grounds for reappeal regarding the application of Article 8 of the Farmland Act

According to Article 83 subparag. 3 of the former National Land Planning and Utilization Act (amended by Act No. 10599, Apr. 14, 2011), even if farmland is farmland, Article 8 of the Farmland Act does not apply to the qualification certificate for acquisition of farmland under Article 8 of the Farmland Act in cases of farmland within an urban area among specific-use areas designated pursuant to Article 36 of the same Act. However, Article 8 of the Farmland Act still applies to farmland not necessary for urban planning facility projects as farmland within a green area among urban areas.

The lower court determined that the provisions on the acquisition certificate of farmland under Article 8 of the Farmland Act continue to apply to each real estate of this case on the ground that each real estate of this case constitutes a natural green belt area, natural green belt area, buffer green belt area, or natural green belt area, and one kind of green belt (35 m to 40 m) as stipulated in the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and that each real estate of this case constitutes a natural green belt as stipulated in the urban planning facility project without stating that all or most of the real estate of this case is necessary for an urban planning facility project, and there is no other document to explain that it is not necessary for an urban planning facility project, and thus, each real estate of this case constitutes farmland not required for an urban planning facility project.

In light of the above legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on the application of Article 8 of the Farmland Act, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of reappeal.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

[Attachment] List of Real Estate: omitted

Justices Min Il-young (Presiding Justice)