The meaning of the so-called "farmland of a person who does not do so" under Article 5 (2) (b) of the Farmland Reform Act;

In a case where the access to previous farmland has been restricted due to a military operational relation, not by a personal circumstance but by a state change, it shall not be included in the concept of the farmland disturbance for a person who does not self-definite as provided in paragraph 2 (b) of this Article.

Article 5 of the Farmland Reform Act

Authorized seal; and

Kim Young-young et al.

Chuncheon District Court Decision 4294 civilian Gong1830 delivered on December 20, 1962

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendants.

As to the Defendants’ agent’ ground of appeal No. 1

Even if this farmland is located in the military operations zone, there is no other legal action that is requisitioned by the military authorities or that is subject to limitation of ownership, the present farmland cannot be found to be in violation of the original judgment which entered into the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants who actually possessed the farmland, the ownership of which was the owner who sought an order of delivery. In the end, there is no reason to argue that the original judgment is limited to the Plaintiff’s ownership of this farmland, and that it is attributable to criticism that the original judgment is legally recognized.

The grounds of appeal No. 2

Although the reasoning of the original judgment on the legal concept of farmland for a person who does not do not do so under Article 5 (2) (b) of the Farmland Reform Act is not somewhat clear, it shall not be included in the concept of farmland for a person who does not have any possibility of applying the provisions of the proviso of subparagraph (b) of the above subparagraph, and it shall not be determined that there is any error in the judgment, since the provision of the proviso of subparagraph (b) of the above subparagraph is interpreted as a conclusion that there is no room for application of each provision under the Enforcement Decree of the Litigation Act or the Enforcement Rule.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges by applying Article 400 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The judge of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Madern (Presiding Judge) Madern Madern Madern Madern Madon