(a) Justifiable reasons under Article 18(1) of the Farmland Reform Act;

(b) Relationship under Article 18 (1) of the Farmland Reform Act with the extension of repayment period;

(a) In a case where a person who received a distribution of farmland under the Farmland Reform Act fails to pay the farmland without any justifiable reason, the Government may claim the return of the farmland concerned, and the justifiable reason in this case is to cover the same amount of the annual production due to the drought, flood, or other force majeure disaster, or to cover the cases where the repayment cannot be paid inevitably due to the equivalent reason.

(b) In the case of a female farmland, the person who has received farmland may apply for the extension of the repayment period in accordance with the related Acts and subordinate statutes and obtain the authorization, or even in the case of a female procedure, if it is deemed that there is a justifiable reason for exhibition, the return of the farmland can not be requested.

Article 18 of the Farmland Reform Act, Article 36 of the Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Reform Act

The Republic of Korea’s legal representative and the Minister of Justice’s failure to accept the truth of the litigation performers of this head;

The number of persons with parental authority, the number of persons with parental authority;

Daegu District Court and Daegu High Court of the second instance;

The main body is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The ground of appeal No. 1, including the plaintiff suit executor, is that at least 1/2 of the lifelong output at the time of the timely demand for extension of the period under Article 26 of the Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Act was notarized, and there is no dispute between the parties as to the establishment of the vehicle. Nevertheless, according to the statement of evidence No. 1, which does not dispute the establishment of the vehicle, and the witness's number, transfer, and transfer of the witness's number, and the testimony of the Song Jin, the court below found that the production amount of the answer falls short of the repayment amount of each year, and it can be recognized that the defendant paid part of the repayment amount, and there is no evidence to reverse the recognition that the defendant paid part of the repayment amount, and there is no evidence to reverse the recognition that the defendant did not pay part of the repayment amount.

The above ground of appeal No. 2 is that the defendant's unpaid act was committed in violation of the rules of evidence and it is not possible to investigate the fair and accurate production volume as long as the inspection committee's fair investigation is conducted in the presence of the staff of the party at the interview, which is the official document No. 1 (the testimony of the defendant witness). The court below acknowledged the difference (No. 1), but it judged that the defendant's act of failure to pay part of the redemption amount for each year is based on the "justifiable cause" of the defendant's act of failure to pay for each year by taking the testimony from the witness's opinion of the plaintiff's relative or the witness's personal knowledge at the meeting with the vehicle and the outside.

The above ground of appeal No. 3 is that the application for extension of the repayment period is necessary for the extension of the repayment period, and even if the repayment period was not paid without the extension of the repayment period, it is not possible to claim the return of the distributed farmland, and it is reasonable to limit the case where the repayment amount was not paid without the "justifiable reason". However, the court below rejected the plaintiff's claim on the ground that the purpose of legislation of Article 36 of the Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Act is "justifiable reason", it can be exempted from the duty of five years only after the application for extension was made and the authorization was obtained, and it is impossible to normalize the payment or default of the repayment amount which was remarkably liable for the full payment by the external method. In this case, the defendant's failure to file an application for extension of the repayment period is not justified, and the defendant's failure to pay part of the repayment amount was caused by the "normal reason", but it is a serious reason for the judgment of the court below that the defendant's failure to pay part of the repayment amount was caused by the original judgment.

If a person who has received a distribution of farmland under the Mental Regulation and Farmland Reform Act fails to pay the farmland without any justifiable reason, the Government may request the return of the farmland in question. In this case, “justifiable cause” means a case where one half or more of the total annual production amount is borne by Han River or any other natural disaster, or where the repayment is inevitable due to the equivalent cause. In such a case, the owner of farmland may apply for the extension of the repayment period in accordance with the procedures for determination of the related Acts and subordinate statutes and obtain the authorization thereof. Even though such procedures are not reasonable, if it is deemed that there are justifiable reasons for the extension of the repayment period, the return of the farmland can not be requested. In this case, each evidence cited in the original judgment can be determined based on the records, the production of witness Gap 1 and the production of witness in the 1951 and the production of witness list in the 1951, and even if there is no legitimate ground for the extension of the period of 100,000 square meters prior to the conclusion of the judgment, it can not be acknowledged as a legitimate cause for the new amendment.

Therefore, this appeal is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition by Article 401 and Article 95 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Justices Kim Dong-dong (Presiding Justice) Acting Justice Kim Jae-ho on the present allocation of Kim Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)