State-owned park sites under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Urban Planning Act shall not be sold or conceded for purposes other than urban planning with respect to such facilities under Article 48 of the same Act.

No State-owned park site under subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of this Act shall be sold or transferred under this Article for any purpose other than urban planning with respect to the relevant facilities.

Article 48 of the Urban Planning Act

Korea

Defendant 1 and one other

Seoul High Court Decision 68Na1169 delivered on November 22, 1968

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendants.

The grounds of appeal by the defendant et al. are examined.

Article 48 of the Urban Planning Act shall not be applied to the case where the land is a state-owned park site under Article 2 subparagraph 1 of the Urban Planning Act, and it shall not be sold or transferred for any purpose other than urban planning under Article 48 of the same Act. With respect to the land, there is no assertion by the defendant that the plan as a park site was changed and disposed of as a result of the change in the plan as a park site, and there is no evidence that there is no circumstance that the plaintiff does not actually manage the land and its neighboring land, or that the plan to use it as a park site is not maintained. Thus, the application of Article 48 of the Urban Planning Act shall not be deemed to be excluded. Thus, the court below's decision that the sale or disposal of the land in this case has not been conducted after the closure of the land adjacent to this case, and even if the value and protection of the Urban Planning Act is not all necessary, it shall be subject to Article 48 of the above Urban Planning Act, and the court below's decision that the sale or purchase of the land in this case is justified by the court below and the court below's decision.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed by the assent of all participating judges, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition.

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