Effect of conditional repayment deposits

In the case of a deposit for repayment, if the debtor makes a deposit on such terms and conditions, notwithstanding the absence of the obligation of the creditor to make any counter-performance or other terms and conditions, the deposit for repayment shall not be effective unless the creditor accepts it, and this shall also apply to the deposit of compensation as deemed identical with the

Article 487 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 65Da2431 Decided February 15, 1966, Supreme Court Decision 65Da210 Decided April 29, 1966, Supreme Court Decision 69Da298, 299 Decided May 27, 1969

Seoul Trust Bank Co., Ltd., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

The Central Land Expropriation Committee

Head of the Army 5330 copies

Seoul High Court Decision 76Gu266 delivered on July 25, 1978

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal by the supplementary intervenor among the costs of appeal are assessed against the supplementary intervenor, and the remainder is assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal by the Defendant and the Intervenor (the supplementary grounds of appeal are examined as well as the subsequent period, and they are subsequent to the supplement of the grounds of appeal).

With respect to No. 1:

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the defendant's intervenor was not entitled to deposit 30,429,60 won with the defendant who is the non-party who is the owner of the land of this case and the defendant who is the related person as the receiver of deposited goods on January 15, 1974 as compensation pursuant to Gap's evidence Nos. 3 and No. 239 of this case's land expropriation decision, and the court below acknowledged that the above non-party as the receiver of deposited goods was not entitled to deposit 961,69,60 won with the contents of consideration, and requested 7 copies of the register of real estate which was transferred to the State (the Ministry of National Defense) and the right other than ownership (the establishment of mortgage), and that the above non-party as the consignee of deposited goods was not entitled to deposit 96,971,97,969,97, which was not entitled to deposit with the court below's decision that held that the defendant was not entitled to deposit 96,16969,969.

With respect to the second ground:

According to the reasoning of the judgment, the court below held that even if the plaintiff's claim under Article 12 of the Administrative Litigation Act is reasonable, the ruling of the so-called ruling that the court may dismiss the claim is neglected without cancelling the illegal disposition, and thus, it may be done only when the degree of infringement on the public interest arising from the cancellation of the judgment is significantly larger than that of infringement on the public interest arising. The defendant joining the defendant may expropriate the land which was used as a site for the Information Headquarters training center before the ruling of expropriation of this case and the cancellation of the disposition, through a series of procedures, even if the disposition was made, and there is no evidence to find that the cancellation of the disposition would bring about a part of the national defense affairs and cause a great damage to the public welfare of the social team, and therefore, it cannot be seen as the requirements of the above ruling. Accordingly, according to the records, the above ruling of the court below is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles on the judgment of circumstances or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberation. Therefore,

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant and the defendant joining the defendant is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with the provisions of Article 14 of the Administrative Litigation Act, Articles 400, 395, and 384 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act, and Articles 95 and 89 of the same Act as to the bearing of litigation costs. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Hah-hak (Presiding Justice)