(a) A direct occupant of the school site, school building, playground, etc.;

(b) Where the articles of incorporation of an incorporated foundation has been donated without obtaining permission from the competent authority and the registration of transfer thereof has been completed, the validity of such donation;

(a) With respect to the school site, teachers, playgrounds, etc. of a school, only the managing body thereof shall be the sole occupant, and school personnel, etc. of a school shall not be the sole owner of such possession, but only the occupying assistant;

B. The basic property donation of the Incorporated Foundation shall be interpreted as an amendment to the articles of incorporation. Therefore, the donation without permission from the competent authority shall not take effect even if the transfer registration of ownership was completed based on the donation without permission from the competent authority.

Articles 42 and 195 of the Civil Act

School juristic persons, the South Korean National Institute of Education

School juristic persons sublime Private Teaching Institutes

Gwangju District Court of the first instance (65 Ghana672)

Supreme Court Decision 66Da926 Decided September 20, 1966

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

The total cost of litigation shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The defendant removes the building in the list of attached Form 1 to the plaintiff, delivers the site for entry in the list of attached Form 2 to the plaintiff, and ordered the building in the list of attached Form 3.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. The defendant's legal representative asserted that this case's real estate cannot be a legitimate party to the principal lawsuit, but as the defendant's legal representative is the physical means of the Gwangju High School and the high school's employees and students are the public structures that continue to exist through the organic combination of these physical and human means (hereinafter referred to as this case's real estate). Since the direct possessor of the real estate in this case's real estate is merely the teachers and employees of this school and the defendant's indirect possessor, the defendant's direct possessor of the real estate in this case's real right should be against the above direct possessor in order to request delivery and evacuation based on real right like this case's assertion that the defendant's legal representative cannot be a legitimate party to the principal lawsuit. However, as the defendant's legal representative is the defendant's legal representative, the defendant's real property is the physical means of the Gwangju High School and the high school manager is the public structures that continue to exist through the organic combination of these physical and human means, and thus, the defendant's physical possessor and the defendant's incidental owner's physical means cannot be the defendant's own owner.

2. Summary of the plaintiff's attorney's assertion

(1) The building sites and buildings listed in the list Nos. 2, 3 were originally constructed by the Korean Association of Korean Diplomatics (hereinafter referred to as the "KIF") for the purpose of education since 1902, and were used as the teacher of the GIF school of Gwangju (former Gwangju People's Day, High School), which was directly operated by the missionary branch, for the purpose of owning land, buildings and equipment necessary for the missionary branch education, Gu rent and other self-employed activities, or supplying necessary assets, the maintenance foundation of the KIF (hereinafter referred to as the "the missionary branch management foundation") was established by using the above real estate as the part of its basic property.

However, in addition to the above sub-pathn School, the missionary Congress established the Honam German Private Teaching Institute for the purpose of conducting secondary education on October 18, 62.18 and operated each school other than the above sub-pathn School (e.g., sub-pathic school, the current status of the management of the high school was as follows), which was restructuring into a school juristic person and became the plaintiff juristic person on June 26, 63.6 of the Private School Act was promulgated on June 12, 64.6.12, the missionaryary Society established the above real estate donation to the plaintiff juristic person on June 12, 64.7.31 of the same year (the plaintiff did not have obtained the permission of the Minister of Delivery and Delivery) and completed the registration of the ownership transfer of the plaintiff's name on July 31 of the same year.

(2) 한편 앞서 밝힌 바와 같이 광주 숭일학교는 선교회에서 직영하다가 1930년부터 재단법인 대한예수교장로회 전남노회 유지재단(이하 노회재단이라 약칭한다)에 넘겨서 이를 경영케 하여 오더니 근년에 그 노회가 둘로 갈려서 말썽이 되어 위 재산 소유자인 선교회 유지재단은 마침내는 1946년부터 1년기간으로 노회재단에게 사용대차하고 매년 갱신되어 도다가 64.3 말로써 기간만료되었으며 특히 위 노회재단과의 당초 사용대차계약시 선교회 유지재단의 승낙없이는 본건 대지상에 건물을 건축하지 않기로 약정하였음에도 불구하고 그 대지상에 별지 제1호 목록기재 건물을 각각 승낙없이 건축 소유하여 본건 부동산을 불법 점거하고 있다가 64.2.28. 조직변경으로 피고가 승계하여 별지 제2,3호 목록기재 부동산에 대한 원고의 소유권을 침해하고 있으므로

(3) The defendant must remove the building entered in the list No. 1, deliver the land entered in the list No. 2 to the plaintiff and order the building entered in the list No. 3.

3. Determination of this case

(1) The fact that each real estate listed in the list Nos. 2 and 3 of the annexed Table is part of basic property of the Foundation's Foundation's Foundation's Foundation's Foundation's Foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation's foundation.

4. Conclusion

If so, it is necessary to dismiss the plaintiff's claim, and the judgment of the first instance court, which included it, is unfair, and the appeal of this case is reasonable.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Embrons (Presiding Judge)