Only the name of the owner on the land cadastre before August 9, 1945 is changed from the Japanese government, and the name on the register is not changed, the ownership on the real estate shall be attributed to such real estate.

If the land cadastre ownership is changed from the Japanese government on July 30, 1945 to the Korean human name, it is interpreted that the land in which such change of ownership is made was not owned by the military authorities of the United States under Article 33 (Abolition) of the Military Administration Act even if there is no registration, and such a legitimate interpretation can also be seen in light of the purpose of Article 1 of the first Agreement on the Finance and Property of the United States of America.

Article 2 of the Military Court Affairs Act, Article 1 of the Korea-U.S. First Agreement on Treasury Property

Olil Dong

Han flood and seven others

Gwangju District Court Decision 61No748 delivered on March 21, 1962

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendants.

The gist of the grounds of appeal by Defendant 8 is that even if this case was owned by the Government of Japan and the Non-Party 1 through an exchange contract between the Government of Seoul and the Non-Party 1, registration as a requisite for setting up against the transfer of ownership had not been made. Thus, the above non-party 12 and 113 cannot oppose the acquisition of ownership against the U.S. military administration since the land was owned by the above Gun administration pursuant to Article 33 of the Gun administration of the Gun administration of the Korea Army Headquarters. However, according to the facts established by the original judgment, the above non-party 12 and 113 were purchased from Japan on February 10, 194 and the above non-party 13 were purchased from Japan on February 10, 194, and the ownership transfer registration was made in the name of the plaintiff on February 21, 194, the above two parcels of land cannot be deemed as the grounds of appeal by the above Gun administration, and even if the ownership transfer registration was made in the name of the non-party 3.

Therefore, by applying Article 400 of the Civil Procedure Act, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Jinjin-man (Presiding Judge) Ma-man, the Mag-man, the Mag-man, the Mag-man,