Extinctive prescription date of the right to claim damages due to illegal farmland distribution disposition;

The defendant's tort, that is, the illegal farmland distribution disposition is terminated at the time of the completion of the repayment due to the distribution of the farmland, and according to the records, it is obvious that the date of the repayment of the land was the date of January 22, 1962, and the date of the lawsuit in this case is August 17, 1972 when ten years have passed from the date of the lawsuit in this case, the plaintiff's right to claim damages should be extinguished

Article 766 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Korea

Busan District Court (72 Gohap1251)

Supreme Court Decision 74Da647 delivered on October 22, 1974

The appeal is dismissed.

All costs of a lawsuit after an appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The original judgment is revoked. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 3,345,00 with 5% interest per annum from September 23, 1972 to the day of full payment. The judgment that the costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant in both the first and second instances.

If the contents of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3-1, 3-2, and Gap evidence Nos. 4 (Real Estate Sales Contract), which are not disputed in the establishment, are collected with the purport of pleading, they are the State-owned administrative property under the original jurisdiction of traffic department. The Minister of Agriculture and Forestry did not take over the above land in 1950 pursuant to Article 10 of the Enforcement Decree of the Farmland Reform Act, and distributed farmland to the non-party. The non-party completed the redemption on Jan. 22, 1962 and passed the registration of transfer on Oct. 29 of the same year, and sold it to the plaintiff on Dec. 5, 1967 through the registration of transfer on Dec. 18, 1967, and the plaintiff and the non-party acquired the ownership transfer registration through the ownership transfer registration under the name of the non-party and the defendant obtained the ownership transfer registration under the above non-party's ownership transfer registration under the name of the non-party and the non-party can not be recognized as the grounds for cancellation of the ownership transfer registration under the above.

Therefore, the distribution of state-owned farmland as farmland without the procedure of transferring the Minister of Finance and Economy shall be due to the negligence of the public official in charge of farmland distribution affairs in charge of farmland distribution affairs, so the defendant is responsible for compensating for the damages suffered by the plaintiff because the plaintiff purchases the above land.

Even if the defendant's litigation performer is liable for damages due to a tort against the defendant, 10 years have passed since the date of the above farmland distribution disposition, and 3 years have passed since the non-party's expiration of the repayment due to the non-party's illegal distribution. Thus, it is reasonable to see that the defendant's tort is the tort, that is, the illegal farmland distribution disposition is terminated at the time of the completion of repayment due to the distribution. As seen above, it is obvious that the date of the completion of repayment of this case's land was about January 22, 1962. According to the records of this case, the plaintiff's right to claim damages is extinguished by the completion of the prescription (it is not recognized that there is any other reason for the interruption of prescription in the above period).

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for objection, which is premised on the above claim for damages, should be dismissed without deciding on the remainder, and the judgment of the court below which is the same purport shall be reasonable, and the appeal shall be dismissed in accordance with Article 384 of the Civil Procedure Act and it shall be decided as per Disposition by applying Articles 96, 95, and 89 of the same Act with respect to the bearing of litigation costs.

Judge Lee Jong-dae (Presiding Judge)