An illegal farmer and a farmer under Article 11 (1) 1 of the Farmland Reform Act

An illegal cultivator shall not be deemed a farmer who cultivates the farmland at present as provided in paragraph (1) 1 of this Article.

Article 11(1)1, Article 3 of the Farmland Reform Act

Plaintiff

Stick-line machines

Busan District Court Decision 61No83 delivered on July 4, 1961, Busan District Court Decision 61Na83 delivered on July 4, 1961

The original judgment shall be reversed.

The case shall be remanded to the Daegu High Court.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are determined.

The original judgment, based on evidence, accepted the plaintiff's right to cultivate farmland in 1948, which was the farmland to which he belongs, and changed into the dry field and dry field, and recognized the plaintiff's right to cultivate farmland as farmland so far, and recognized that the plaintiff's right to cultivate farmland has reached the plaintiff's claim. However, in order to cultivate farmland, it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff's right to cultivate farmland has a right to cultivate the farmland belonging to the plaintiff, since the plaintiff was transferred from the Dong Kimpo only, as recognized by the original judgment, and if it should be based on the facts recognized by the original judgment, it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff illegally cultivated the farmland belonging to the plaintiff. Thus, it cannot be deemed that the plaintiff is a farmer who cultivates the farmland as of the present point of view under Article 11 (1) 1 of the Farmland Reform Act, and that it cannot be viewed that the plaintiff's new decision is a legal witness, unless the original judgment accepted by the court below, and that the plaintiff's defendant's right to cultivate farmland should be justified in light of this case's legal reasoning.

Supreme Court Judge Lee Young-chul(Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice)