beta
Main Issues
The legitimate owner of cancellation of lease and the effect of reaching such declaration of intention on the date of pleading.
Summary of Judgment
The assertion that the disposition to cancel the lease is legitimate on the date of pleading can be seen as having expressed the other party his/her intention to terminate the lease on the same day.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 23(2) of the State Property Act
Plaintiff-Appellant
Plaintiff
Defendant-Appellee
Head of the Nowon-gu Tax Office
Intervenor joining the Defendant
Defendant 1 and 15 others
original decision
Seoul High Court Decision 69Gu70 delivered on July 8, 1969
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Reasons
The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since an administrative disposition of cancellation of the above lease agreement (1957.7.9) against the plaintiff on June 24, 1963, which the plaintiff claimed nullification in this case, was not notified of the disposition to the plaintiff, the defendant's disposition of cancellation cannot take effect against the plaintiff. However, according to Article 2 of Gap's certificate 41 (property lease agreement) which is not disputed, the term of validity of the above contract shall be one year starting from the date of conclusion of the contract, and it shall be deemed to have been renewed under the same condition unless there is any special expression of the above condition after the expiration of the contract period, the above lease agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant shall be deemed to have been renewed for 16 years on the same condition. The court below's decision that the above lease agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant cannot be seen to have been renewed for 16 years prior to the above cancellation of the lease agreement on the 196th day before the expiration of the contract. The defendant's new statement of cancellation of the lease agreement shall not be justified.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed by the assent of all participating judges. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition.
Judge Han-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court