The validity of a lease disposition made by an appropriate authority for a transfer site, which is an appurtenant facility to the vested farmland;

Only the disposal agency of the farmland to which the vested farmland belongs may lease the farmland legally and effectively.

Article 2 (1) of the Farmland Reform Act

E. E.N.

The Director-General of Gwangju

Gwangju High Court Decision 63Gu8 delivered on July 24, 1964

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The plaintiff's attorney's ground of appeal No. 4 is examined.

The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the original judgment is in violation of the law and is based on the Supreme Court precedents (Supreme Court Decision 143 delivered on March 15, 1963). Since the Farmland Reform Act promulgated first is not affected by the Act on the Disposal of Property Reversion enacted later, the validity of the Farmland Reform Act, which was enforced first, is not affected by the Act on the Disposal of Property Reversion Reversion, it is stipulated in Article 2 of the Farmland Reform Act, so it cannot be viewed as the subject matter of the Act on the Disposal of Property Reversion after the subject matter of this case in which the facility such as

According to Article 2 (2) of the Act on the Improvement of Farmland, facilities, such as a pumping station directly required for farmland management, shall be deemed to be reverted to the relevant piece of farmland. Therefore, in a case where the owner of a pumping station is the same as the owner of the relevant piece of farmland, a pumping station shall be deemed to be traded at the same time as an accessory to the farmland, unless there is any justifiable reason by the special group. In the case of farmland to which the owner of the pumping station belongs, the Government shall concurrently own farmland and its accessory to the farmland, and the disposal of the pumping station facilities shall be deemed to be effective for the lease of the pumping station facilities, and only the disposal agency of the farmland to which the owner of the pumping station belongs without any special reason shall be deemed to be valid for the lease. According to the original judgment, the court below erred by misapprehending the above legal principles, and therefore, it cannot be deemed to be unlawful that the lease disposition of the owner of the pumping station is judged on the premise that it is legitimate and effective, and the appeal related to this point shall not be reversed first of all, and the judgment shall not be reversed.

Supreme Court Judge Ma-man (Presiding Judge) Ma-dong (Presiding Judge)