Effect of disposition on fundamental property of a public-service corporation which is not permitted by the competent authority (Invalidity)

Article 11 (3) of the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Public-Service Corporations concerning the Disposal of Fundamental Property of Public-Service Corporations is a mandatory provision and the disposal of basic property of public-service corporations without obtaining permission from the competent authority in violation of this provision is null and void. The same applies to cases where creditors of public-service corporations offset the basic property of public-service

Article 11 (3) of the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Public Interest Corporations

Supreme Court Decision 84Ma591 Decided December 1, 1984 (Gong1985, 348) Supreme Court Decision 87Meu2406 Decided July 11, 1989 (Gong1989, 1210)

An incorporated Automobile Labor Union and Busan Scholarship Branch (Attorney Lee Nam-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Seoul Bank (Law Firm Busan General Law Office, Attorneys Cho Jae-in et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Busan High Court Decision 95Na7628 delivered on January 17, 1997

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged the facts of the judgment after compiling the adopted evidence, and judged that the deposit claim of KRW 100 million in this case is the basic property stated in the plaintiff's articles of incorporation, and even if the deposit bank did not enter the changed contents from the original deposit bank to the defendant bank in the list of basic property in the articles of incorporation, the deposit claim of KRW 100 million in this case does not change the plaintiff's basic property. In light of the relevant provisions of the Records and the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Public Interest Corporations, the judgment of the court below is just and it is not erroneous

In addition, Article 11(3) of the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Public-Service Corporations concerning the Disposal of Fundamental Property of Public-Service Corporations is a mandatory provision and the disposal of basic property of public-service corporations without obtaining permission from the competent authority in violation of such provision is null and void (see Supreme Court Decision 87Meu2406, Jul. 11, 1989). This also applies where a creditor of public-service corporations offsets his/her basic property of public-service corporations by his/

In the same purport, the court below is just in holding that the defendant's declaration of set-off or set-off agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant who made the claim of this case as a passive claim is null and void unless there is permission from the competent authority, and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles on Article 11 of the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Public Interest Corporations

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Cho Chang-hun (Presiding Justice)