Right to use reserved land for replotting under the Urban Planning Ordinance;

Where a reserved land is designated, the previous landowner shall obtain the right to use the reserved land.

Articles 43 and 47 of the Urban Planning Ordinance, Article 24 of the Land Improvement Order

No. 20

Water fever

Kim Jong-han

Seoul High Court Decision 59No236, 992 delivered on February 28, 1961

the original judgment shall be reversed.

The case shall be remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal by the plaintiff and the intervenor are examined.

The judgment of the court below is justified for rejecting the plaintiff and the intervenor's request for the removal of the building site and the plaintiff's request for the delivery of the site. Even if the plaintiff was designated as the land as the land as the land as the land as the land to be the land to be the land to be the land for substitution, the plaintiff and the intervenor who acquired the plaintiff's ownership as well as the plaintiff's previous land by auction cannot acquire any right. Thus, this claim for removal of the building site and delivery of the land to the previous land owner is unreasonable. However, if the administrative agency executing the urban planning project designates the previous land as the land to be the land to be the land to be the land to be the land to be the land for substitution and order the previous land owner to transfer the land, the previous land owner is not entitled to acquire the ownership of the land to be the land to be the land to be the land to be the land for substitution (Supreme Court Decision 429Do17,18 delivered on December 14, 1961). Thus, the right to use is violated, and if the building on this site to be remanded to the defendant, the land to be removed and remanded.

Judge Lee Young-young (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court