Whether a purchaser of a right to temporary cultivation of land can directly claim the transfer of the land to a third party (negative)

The right to temporary cultivation of the above land held by a person who has acquired the above right to temporary cultivation from a person designated as a person who has obtained the right to temporary use of the State-owned land in succession under the provisions of the Rural Community Modernization Promotion Act is merely the obligatory right, and it has no detailed effect. Therefore, the purchaser of the above right to temporary cultivation cannot directly request a third party to transfer the land

Article 389 of the Civil Act

Paper punishment;

Jeong-tae et al.

Jeonju District Court Decision 82 Gohap92

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The plaintiff shall revoke the judgment of the first instance.

Defendant Jeong Jong-tae, the Plaintiff, at the same place as the 1,924 square meters from the e.g. (number 1 omitted), the 3,980 square meters from the e.g. (number 2 omitted), the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e., the e.

The total cost of the lawsuit is the judgment of the defendants and the declaration of provisional execution.

There is no dispute between the parties concerned regarding the fact that Defendant Jong-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-do, at the same place as (number 1 omitted) 1,924 square meters, (number 2 omitted) 3,980 square meters, and the fact that he occupies the land of 2,814 square meters (number 3 omitted) at the same place (number 3 omitted) at 2,814 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “the land of the said 3 lots”) at the same time.

The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff was designated as the temporary right to use the land of this case, which was enforced at the time by the Governor of Jeollabuk-do on May 22, 1980 by the last Gu of the non-party who is the citizen of the damage from the Seogjin River area, pursuant to Article 103 of the Agricultural Community Modernization Promotion Act, and the last district was designated as the state-owned temporary right to use the land of this case on the same day, and the above last district was dispatched to the non-party Song Han-dae on July 9, 1981, and the above Jung-gu was assigned the right to temporary use the land of this case to the plaintiff on December 5, 1981, and the plaintiff was entitled to the temporary right to use the land of this case. The defendants illegally occupied each of this case.

The plaintiff's right to temporary cultivation of the land in this case purchased from the Non-party Jink's Gangwon-do is merely an obligatory right and has no detailed effect (see Supreme Court Decision 80Da1362, Jun. 23, 1981). Thus, even if the plaintiff purchased the right to temporary cultivation of the land in this case from the Non-party Jink's Gangwon-do Rules, it is not possible for the plaintiff to directly claim the transfer of the land in this case to the defendant who is a third party. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion does not need to be examined further.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for objection shall be dismissed without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed without merit, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff who has lost. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Sung-il (Presiding Justice)