A. The owner of the right to the property devolvingd shall sell his/her right to the annual interest on the part of the owner, and the buyer shall acquire the ownership of the property which he/she acquired and then has not purchased the right to the annual interest (effective) and the contract to transfer the ownership to the seller is valid;

(b) A person (or his successor) who has received a decision of cancellation of reversion by a simplified appeal procedure has the right to file an appeal, insofar as he independently occupies the reverted property, even if not confirmed by law No. 120.

A. In selling and buying the right of annual payments for the property devolving upon the State, the State acquired the ownership of the property devolving upon the State and attached the condition that the ownership of the property shall be divided, transferred, and returned to the seller, and the whole content of the sales contract shall not be illegal.

(b) A person (or his successor) who has received a decision of cancellation of the reversion by a simplified appeal procedure shall have the right to preferentially purchase and lease the reverted property, except in extenuating circumstances, even if it was returned to the reverted property because it was not confirmed by Law No. 120.

Article 15 of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to Jurisdiction, Article 22 of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to Jurisdiction

Plaintiff

A school juristic person or a private teaching institute

Seoul High Court Decision 66Na3124 delivered on March 8, 1968, Seoul High Court Decision 66Na3124 delivered on March 8, 1968

The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The Plaintiff’s agent’s ground of appeal No. 1

On May 24, 1954, the court below issued a confirmation request to Nonparty 1, who was the principal of the new school, as the successor of the defendant, and sold the remaining 1.60,004 square meters excluding 1,90,000 square meters of the original forest in the original city to 8,000,000,000,000 from the original forest in the original city, and received a down payment of 1,50,000,000,000,000 from the original forest in the original city until June of that year, the court below held that the ownership transfer registration acquired by the plaintiff as the former non-party 2 as of July 23, 194 as the result of the decision of cancellation of reversion to the original state, which was promulgated by the law on the confirmation of cancellation of reversion to April 8, 1950, and therefore, the parties violated the above confirmation request, even if the ownership becomes invalid as the sale of the above forest in the original city, and held the purchaser’s ownership transfer to the next 1606.

However, even if the application for confirmation of cancellation of ownership of the transferred real estate is dismissed and its ownership is returned to the original state, the transferor or his successor has the right to lease and purchase the real estate preferentially in accordance with the provisions of the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging, unless there are any special reasons. This right of interest belongs to a category of the property right that can be transferred in light of the contents and social circumstances of the party members (see Supreme Court Decision 54Da64 delivered on February 4, 1955 and Decision 57No211 delivered on April 8, 195). Accordingly, in selling this right of interest, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the transfer of ownership from the original judgment by purchasing the ownership from the country to the partial notification that was not purchased by the purchaser and attaching conditions such as the transfer and return of ownership to the seller. Accordingly, the court below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the transfer of ownership after the transfer of the right of attribution.

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak Kim Gyeong-ri, Kim & Kim