Where a lease contract is terminated by agreement between a lessor and a lessee and a lessee is agreed to remove a ground building, the provisions of Articles 643 and 652 of the Civil Act shall not apply.

The provisions of Articles 643 and 652 of the Civil Act shall not apply to cases where a lease contract is terminated by agreement between a lessor and a lessee and a lessee have been concluded to remove a building on the ground.

Articles 643, 283, and 652 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and three others

Seoul High Court Decision 68Na2404 delivered on March 28, 1969

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendants.

1. In the judgment as to the Defendants’ ground of appeal No. 1, based on records, and considering the Defendant’s purport of pleading, it is just in the court below’s decision that there was no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the building was owned by Defendant No. 1, and that the building was previously purchased and used by Defendant No. 4, that Defendant removed it in March 1964, and that the building was newly constructed on the ground. Thus, even if the ownership preservation registration for the building was not made on the ground of this case, it is reasonable in the court below’s decision that there was no dispute between the parties as to the fact that the building was owned by Defendant No. 4, and that the building was constructed by Nonparty No. 1 on the first ground of this case is itself a building on which the building

2. Determination as to the ground of appeal No. 2

The agreement between the plaintiff in writing No. 1 and the defendant 4, which was adopted by the original judgment, cannot be said to be in violation of the law of evidence against the rejection of the original judgment's claim on the theory that the defendant 4 caused the plaintiff's deception. In addition, in accordance with Articles 643 and 652 of the Civil Act, in the land lease for the purpose of owning a building, the lessee may exercise the right to claim purchase of the building upon the expiration of the lease period, and the lessee may not exercise the right to claim purchase of the building, and there is no agreement unfavorable to the lessee as a breach of the contract, and such provision shall not be applied to the case where the lessor and the lessee agreed to remove the building on the ground, and such agreement shall not be deemed null and void as it constitutes Article 104 of the Civil Act.

3. The appeal is without merit, and the costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing party and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Kimchi-bi (Presiding Judge)