(a) A lawsuit or petition on the property devolving upon it;

(b) Effect of a petition filed against the covenant on the lease of property devolving upon the sale or disposal of such property;

(c) Sublease of any change in the structure of a building and cancellation of the sales contract made by the purchaser of the property devolving upon the State without approval of the original state;

(a) Inasmuch as the purchaser of any property devolving upon the State’s approval is in violation of Article 34 of this Act to dispose of the building’s structural change, sub-lease, etc., the government may cancel the sales contract on this ground;

(b) An appeal on the lease contract shall also affect the sale and disposition due to the lease contract.

Even if a party misleads the appeal procedure and submits a petition or petition, etc. to the relevant authorities, it shall be converted into a petition in accordance with the content thereof.

Articles 22, 34, and 39 of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to Jurisdiction; Article 52 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to Jurisdiction

Gambling Promotion

The Director General of the Seoul Metropolitan Government

Cho public relations Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 56Da248 delivered on October 21, 1957

With respect to the lawsuit on the property devolving upon the first ground of appeal, it is not reasonable that the court below's decision that the defendant's supplementary intervenor transferred the real estate to the plaintiff on March 23, 1949 to the competent authorities to convert it into the appeal under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Act Article 39 of the Civil Procedure Act Article 52 of the Enforcement Decree of the Civil Procedure Act shall be submitted via the competent authorities for disposition of the property devolving upon the second ground of appeal, and it is reasonable to convert the appeal into the appeal in accordance with the contents of the case, even if the plaintiff's supplementary intervenor submitted the appeal or petition to the competent authorities due to a defect in the prescribed procedures (Article 46 of the Civil Procedure Act No. 46 of 1956). Thus, it is not reasonable to acknowledge that the court below's decision that the lease contract was not renewed due to the cancellation of the decision that the plaintiff's supplementary intervenor sold the real estate to the plaintiff on July 27, 195.

Article 22 (2) of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to 2 and 3 provides that a purchaser of property devolving upon the State shall perform the duties of a manager provided for in Chapter 4 of the same Act until his/her ownership is transferred. Thus, as recognized by the court below, the disposition of sub-lease, etc. of this case without the defendant's approval is a so-called violation of Article 34 of the same Act, and the defendant may rescind the sales contract for this case against the plaintiff under Article 22 (3) of the same Act. Thus, the defendant's disposition

Justices White-sung (Presiding Justice)