State forest has the right to manage and dispose of it to the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry unless it is under the management of other management authorities pursuant to Articles 4(2) and 9 of the State Property Act.

State forest has the right to manage and dispose of state forest land to the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry unless it is under the management of other management authorities pursuant to Articles 4(2) and 9 of the former State Property Act (Law No. 405, Nov. 28, 56).

Article 34 of the Forestry Act

Supreme Court Decision 67Da1644 delivered on December 19, 1967

Korea

Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 67Na844 delivered on June 21, 1968, Seoul High Court Decision 67Na844 delivered on July 21, 1968

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to Seoul Civil District Court Panel Division.

With respect to the grounds of appeal by the plaintiff performer:

According to the reasoning explanation in the judgment of the court below, the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry decided on June 22, 1962 that the sale of the forest in this case is legitimate since the director general of Seoul bureau representing the plaintiff sold it to the defendant on June 10, 1963, after the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry decided on the abolition of the use of the State Property Investigation Committee, among the forest under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and managed as administrative property by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry

However, if the forest of this case is a state-owned forest of this case, even if it falls under the prescribed forest of the Forestry Act, it shall be determined exclusively by the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry pursuant to Articles 4(2) and 9 of the State Properties Act, so long as it is not under the management of other management authorities, the management and disposal authority between the state-owned forest of this case and the non-permanent forest of this case shall be vested in the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry pursuant to Article 34 of the Forestry Act (see Supreme Court Decisions 67Da1644 delivered on December 19, 1967; 67Da1522 delivered on January 31, 1968), but without examining and determining whether the forest of this case is a state-owned forest of this case, even if it is a state-owned forest of this case, it shall be deemed that the decision of the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry's subordinate agency of the Ministry of Finance and Economy was lawful, and it shall be justified and there is a reason for the conclusion.

Therefore, by the assent of all participating judges, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Civil Procedure District Court. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Supreme Court Judge Ma-dong (Presiding Judge) Ma-dong (Presiding Judge)