구동독지역의 미해결재산문제에 관한 유럽인권법원의 판결과 우리법의 시사점 - von Maltzan 사건과 Jhan 사건을 중심으로 -

This paper is concerned with two decisions of ECHR on the unsolved property in the GDR before the Germany Reunification. One decision is about the case von Maltzan and others, by whom is represented the application in ECHR. The other decision about the case of Jahn and others, by whom is represented the application in ECHR. These applications were one of the major issues to arise after reunification of Germany: compensation for those whose property was expropriated either between 1945 and 1949 in the Soviet Occupied Zone of Germany following the land reform or after 1949 in the GDR. The reason of the applications in ECHR can be found on refusing to certain the appeal on the Federal Administrative Court and the Federal Constitutional Court. The applicants have appealed the ECHR to preform the own property right through the judgement of EHCR. However, the applications was failed to recover and to perform the property right. The ECHR presented that the decisions of the Federal Administrative Court and the Federal Constitutional Court don't have the violation of German legal point. Of course, the Germany government made the act concerning preventing the lost property owner in Soviet Occupied Zone of Germany and compensating to those owner by the amendment of the Property Act. But the applicants had no fully compensation and didn't satisfy the public action of the relevant public office and the concerned contents of the legislature. ECHR was interested in legal violation or not and in public interest or not. The decisions of two different Germany Courts was unviolated in legal point and was corresponding with the pubic interest. Finally, this paper is connected with that those decisions are implicated in Korea unification in the future. After Korea unification, the legality and the public interest should be considered to resolve those issues.