The Foundation for the 100th Anniversary of the Korean Church Wins Appeal in a Supreme Court Decision

On February 28th, the Supreme Court, by a unanimous decision of the ruling Justices, denied appeal filed by Kyungsung Gumi-in Cemetery Association (represented by Won, Han Suk, Underwood IV)(the Association) against the Foundation for the 100th Anniversary of the Korean Church (the Foundation) and ordered the Association to pay the costs of appeal to the Council.

The History of Legal Action
The Association had filed a petition for civil mediation in December of 2008, claiming that its transfer of title to Yanghwajin Foreign Missionary Cemetery to the Foundation was null and void. The civil mediation, which took place for about a year, did not result in a resolution of the dispute, and the Association initiated a legal action against the Foundation challenging the transfer of title in April of 2010. The court ordered the parties to try mediation, and the mediation took place on November 26th and December 13th of 2010. The mediation failed as the Association rejected the final three conditions proposed by the Foundation for settlement. The court of the first instance then ruled against and dismissed all of the petitions filed by the Association on June 10, 2011.

The Association then filed an appeal with the Seoul High Court. The Seoul High Court also ordered mediation which took place on February 17, June 12th and July 16th of 2010, respectively. These mediation efforts also failed, and the Seoul High Court, as the court of the second instance, dismissed the appeal filed by the Association at a hearing held on October 11, 2012.

Although the Association’s claims were dismissed by the lower courts which based their decisions on the rule of law and principal of judicial fairness, the Association decided to challenge their rulings by filing an appeal with the Supreme Court on October 30, 202. While the Supreme Court deliberated on the case, the President, the Deputy President of Public Affairs and the Dean of the Law School of Yonsei University each filed a petition requesting the court to examine the facts of the case in favor of the Association. However, the Supreme Court ruled on February 28th dismissing the appeal. It had taken four years and three months since the civil mediation began for the case to come to a close with the decision of the Supreme Court.

The Substance of the Supreme Court’s Ruling
In its appeal to the Supreme Court, the Association argued that the case must be remanded to the Seoul High Court because the decision of the Seoul High Court was contrary to the prior Supreme Court precedents. The Supreme Court, however, dismissed all of the grounds for appeal claimed by the Association, noting that the Association’s arguments made in support of such claim were mere repetitions of prior arguments, and it found no error in the lower court’s interpretation or law or admission of evidences. The following are the findings made by the Supreme Court with respect to each of the arguments made by the Association in the appeal.

1) Yanghwajin cannot be regarded as a conditional gift
The Association claimed that the contract by which Yanghwajin was transferred to the Foundation in 1985 was a conditional gift agreement which required satisfaction of three conditions for the transfer to occur. If such conditions were not satisfied, the contract was subject to cancellation. The lower courts, which determined the transfer as an unconditional gift, therefore, violated Supreme Court precedents regarding interpretation of legal acts and the procedural rules that apply to the consideration of formal and substantive evidences. In addition, the Association argued that the lower courts erred by failing to address some of the claims made by the Association.

The Supreme Court, however, determined that the evidences submitted by the Association were insufficient to establish that the Foundation had granted a perpetual right to use and maintain Yanghwajin to the Association on exclusive basis; that the fact that the Association’s exclusive right to use and maintain Yanghwajin became terminated was not sufficient to lead to the cancellation of the gift contract itself, and “since there was no evidence to the contrary, the decision of the lower court was proper.” Accordingly, the Supreme Court held that the lower court had not committed any error of breaching or failing to consider a prior Supreme Court precedent which was applicable.

2) The gift of Yanghwajin was legally and validly made
The Association claimed that its gift of Yanghwajin to the Foundation was null and void because its representative made an unconditional gift in violation of its internal resolution which conditioned the gift on the satisfaction of three conditions. The Association also claimed that the lower courts did not properly consider such claim. Further, the Association claimed that the lower court decision regarding the transfer of title registration in favor of the Foundation pursuant to the gift made in 1985 only had a procedural effect and did not have any binding effect as to preclude the Association from claiming that the gift was null and void. The Association also argued that the lower court should have allowed the Association a hearing in order to determine whether the prior court ruling on the title transfer registration should have any relevance or binding effect on the Association’s claim of the contract being null and void; and that since the lower court did not do so, the court could not properly deliberate on the issue and, therefore, made an error in its decision.

However, the Supreme Court found that the special council meeting of the Association could not be viewed as having made a decision to make a conditional gift. In addition, even if the Association’s representative had made an unconditional gift in violation of a resolution of its council, the Supreme Court held that “there is no evidence to support that the Foundation knew or should have known of such fact, and given the court’s decision regarding the transfer of title registration, the plaintiff’s argument cannot be accepted as it challenges the binding nature of the non-appealable decision.” Further, the Supreme Court held that the lower court had not erred in violating the Supreme Court’s precedents regarding the binding effect of a final decision or in failing its duty to be intellectually rigorous. In addition, the Association’s argument that the gifting of Yanghwajin is invalid because it was not approved by a general meeting of the Association did not merit consideration because the Association had not raise such issue at all prior to the appeal.

3) The Foundation had properly maintained Yanghwajin in compliance with law
The Association claimed that the Foundation granted the Association the beneficial interest to and the right of use of Yanghwajin and Mission Memorial Hall in perpetuity. It argued that the lower court, in finding that there was no evidence to prove that the Foundation had waived the use of and the beneficial interest to Yanghwajin and Mission Memorial Hall in perpetuity, went beyond the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

The Supreme Court found, in reviewing and analyzing the evidences submitted by the Foundation in lower court proceeding, held that the Association only appears to have used and maintained Yanghwajin and the Mission Memorial Hall, and there was no evidence that would lead to the finding that the Foundation had waived the right of use and the beneficial interest to Yanghwajin and the Mission Memorial Hall in perpetuity. Further, the Supreme Court held that the lower court, in deliberating on this issue, had not committed an error of going beyond the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

Gratitude and Resolution
The Foundation for the 100th Anniversary of Korean Churches, together with 100th Anniversary Memorial Church which has cultivated and cared for Yanghwajin in midst of numerous misunderstandings and difficulties, welcomes the decision of the Supreme Court. We thank God who has declared to all that neither the Foundation nor the 100th Anniversary Memorial Church is the owner of Yanghwajin but its mere stewards. The Foundation and the 100th Anniversary Memorial Church resolve to care for Yanghwajin as a sacred site with more humility, to inherit the spirit of faith of 100 years of Korean mission, and nurturing the vision for the 200 years of the mission.