The case reversing the judgment of the court below on the ground that the facts were found without evidence.

The case reversing the judgment of the court below on the ground that there was an error of finding the above facts without any evidence, although there was no evidence to prove that the farmland was transferred before it was transferred from the receiver of the farmland devolving upon the State

Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Korea

Defendant

Gwangju District Court Decision 93Na7071 delivered on April 15, 1994

The judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the Gwangju District Court Panel Division.

As to the Grounds of Appeal

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the non-party 1 purchased the above non-party 1's land number on December 6, 1969 (the non-party 2's husband's above 4) 926 square meters (the land of this case omitted) from the non-party 2's non-party 4 and the non-party 1's land lot number on the non-party 4 (the non-party 1's land number omitted) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the non-party 2's land of this case on the non-party 1's name and the non-party 4's land lot number on the non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party 1's non-party 9's non-party 4's non-party 1's non-party 3's non-party 4's non-party 1's non-party 6's non-party 3's non-party 1'.

2. As decided by the court below, if it is not recognized that Nonparty 2 had received the transfer from Nonparty 7, who was the original owner of Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Seo-dong (Saek 2 omitted), 297, which was the land before the land substitution in this case, the above land was purchased from an unentitled Person 1, the deceased non-party 1, who was the deceased non-party 1, who was the deceased non-party 2, the defendant cannot obtain any right to the above land. Ultimately, the transfer registration of ownership in this case's land in this case is a registration invalidation of cause inconsistent with the substantive relationship. Thus, the evidence presented by the court below, namely, evidence No. 8-1 to 4, evidence No. 9, evidence No. 11-1 to 1, No. 11-2, and evidence No. 13, witness No. 5 of the court of first instance, and witness non-party 6 of the court below's judgment, and evidence that the above non-party 2 received from the above non-party 7.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in finding facts without evidence, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and there is a ground to point this out.

3. The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Jong-sik (Presiding Justice)