In accordance with the decision to review a petition for property devolving upon the State, the cancellation of the lease disposition by the State, and the defect of the petition or deliberation.

(a) In the event that the administrative agency revokes a lease disposition by a decision of the Appeal Council, if the lessee is deemed to have a reason to revoke the lease disposition even if there is a defect in the appeal or deliberation decision, such revocation disposition is unlawful;

B. In the event the lessee of the real estate devolvingd to the State destroys most of the real estate, and makes large-scale structural changes, causing large damages to the State, and the State did not obtain approval from the Director-General, there is sufficient reason to cancel the relevant lease contract.

Article 39 of the Act on Asset Disposal for Reversion

University, a foundation, a single university

Director General of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Government

Cho public relations Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 56Da142 delivered on September 18, 1957

If there is a reason to cancel the lease contract against the lessee of the property devolving upon the appeal of the interested party, the government-owned company may cancel the lease contract by deliberation by the interested party or ex officio. Therefore, even if the government-owned agency cancels the lease contract in accordance with the decision of the Appeal Council, if there is a defect in the appeal or deliberation, the cancellation disposition by the government-owned agency can be regarded as legitimate if the reason that the lease contract is substantially cancelled to the lessee. In this case, even though the appeal by the defendant-funded intervenor on December 29, 1953 of the short-term period of December 21, 1953 cannot be recognized as effective as the theory, even if the appeal by the defendant-funded intervenor on December 29, 1953 of the short-term of June 21, 1956 is recognized as a reason to cancel the Act on the Disposal of Property Belonging to the plaintiff on June 21, 1956, the original judgment that recognized the cancellation as legitimate

Justices Kim Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)