The validity of land expropriation made by a public project operator, without negligence, a person holding a title on the register as the person subject to expropriation.

In the case of land expropriation under the Land Expropriation Act, etc., if a project owner considers a nominal owner on the register as a landowner and completes the procedure of expropriation by designating the person as the person subject to expropriation due to his/her lack of negligence, the effect of the expropriation cannot be denied, and the ownership already owned by the owner of the object of expropriation shall be extinguished, and at the same time the project owner shall acquire the right at the time.

Article 187 of the Civil Act, Articles 23 and 67 of the Land Expropriation Act

Supreme Court Decision 71Da873 delivered on June 22, 1971 (No. 192Du151) 79Da1369 delivered on September 25, 1979 (Gong1979, 1225) 80Da316 delivered on June 9, 1981 (Gong1981, 13986)

Han-Jon General Law, Attorney Noh Jae-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellant

Korea National Housing Corporation (Attorney Kim Jong-soo et al., Counsel for defendant)

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 1 other (Attorney Kim Byung-jin, Counsel for defendant-appellee)

Seoul High Court Decision 89Na4833 delivered on January 25, 1991

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

As to the Grounds of Appeal

In the case of land expropriation under the Land Expropriation Act, etc. on the basis of the facts indicated by the court below, if the land expropriation is made under the Land Expropriation Act without the fault of the project owner, and the land owner on the register is regarded as the land owner and completed the procedure for the expropriation, the effect of the expropriation cannot be denied. The ownership already held by the project owner on the register cannot be denied, and at the same time the land owner is extinguished, and there is no assertion that there is negligence in the above expropriation procedure of the defendant Korea National Housing Corporation, and there is no proof, the defendant Korea National Housing Corporation has lawfully acquired the ownership on the land in the case of this case due to the acquisition on the ground of consultation from the date of use by the defendant who is the title owner on the register as at November 6, 1987, it is consistent with the interpretation of Articles 23, 25, 61, 64, and 67 of the Land Expropriation Act (see Supreme Court Decision 70Da14597, May 24, 197; Supreme Court Decision 200Da16369797, Jun. 197, 197. 197

For this reason, this appeal is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon Young-young (Presiding Justice)