The criteria for determining whether temporary loans can be borrowed without permission from the competent authorities under Article 11 (1) 3 of the former Buddhist Property Management Act (Abolition)

According to Article 11 (1) 3 of the former Management of the Buddhist Foundation Act, when borrowing a loan or guaranteeing a debt for a third party within the scope of the budget for the operation of the inspection, it shall be subject to permission from the competent agency, but the temporary loan repaid with the revenue within the fiscal year concerned shall not be. Whether the act of borrowing the inspection is a temporary loan which can be borrowed without obtaining permission from the competent agency which redeems the revenue of the fiscal year concerned within the scope of the inspection's budget for the operation of the inspection shall be considered in consideration of various circumstances that may affect the sound operation of the inspection, such as whether the loan is necessary for the operation of the inspection, the scale of the inspection's budget, the scope of the revenue of the fiscal year concerned, the repayment period of the loan and the certainty of the repayment.

Article 11 (1) 3 of the former Educational Property Management Act (repealed by Act No. 3974 of Nov. 28, 1987)

Kim Ho-ho Law Firm, Attorneys Yoon Jong-ho et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Seo-gu et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

Daejeon District Court Decision 89Na1825 delivered on March 22, 1990

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Daejeon District Court Panel Division.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The court below, around July 1986, at the time when the plaintiff temple was widely known, started the construction of an access road to the defendant temple, which is located on the repair of the defendant temple, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do, and collected the Special Metropolitan City amount of KRW 10,00,00 from the new bonds of the defendant temple on July 1, 1987, and received the Special Metropolitan City owner from the president of the Korean New Do Association, the president of the Korean-do Vice-president and the well-known personnel in his name. The above red ju-gun's loan from the plaintiff 10,00,000 won was borrowed from the plaintiff 10,000,000 won, and it did not enter the above 87,000,000 won and paid the above 97,000,0000 won, and it did not enter the above 97,087,000,0000 won, and it did not enter the above 97,08,07,086,06,07,06,0,07,07.

According to Article 11 (1) 3 of the Buddhist Property Management Act, which was in force at the time of inspection, the inspection shall obtain permission from the competent agency when borrowing money or guaranteeing debts for a third party within the scope of its budget, but it shall not be the temporary loan repaid with revenues within the fiscal year concerned. This means that the inspection aims to prevent the inspection from incurring improper debts and to ensure the sound operation of the inspection, which shall contribute to the improvement of the social culture as well as its original purpose of existence. Thus, the question of whether the inspection borrowed temporary loans can be borrowed with revenues within the fiscal year concerned without the permission from the competent agency within the scope of its budget for the operation of the inspection shall be considered in full view of various circumstances that may affect the sound operation of the inspection, such as the size of the inspection's budget, the scope of revenue in the fiscal year concerned, the period of repayment of borrowed money and the certainty of repayment.

The court below held that the loan of this case constitutes temporary loans that can be borrowed without permission from the competent authorities on the ground that the loan of this case is funds necessary for the access road construction with an amount within the budget limit of the defendant temple and used for the construction, and the amount of the Special Metropolitan City share collected in 1987, etc., and merely because of the above circumstances in the court below's approval, the loan of this case constitutes illegal acts of misunderstanding the legal principles concerning temporary loan which can be borrowed without permission from the competent authorities under the Act on the Management of Buddhist Property and this point is with merit.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Yong-dong (Presiding Justice)