[건물철거등][공19841.1.(719),22]
Whether the grounds for violation of the rules of evidence fall under the grounds for appeal of right
The court below's argument that the place of appeal is inconsistent with the Supreme Court's decision, and the case of violation of the precedents on the rules of evidence refers to a violation of the rules of evidence cannot be viewed as a legitimate ground for appeal because it does not constitute any ground for appeal under Article 11 of the Act on
Article 11(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition etc. of Legal Proceedings
Supreme Court Decision 82Da493, 82Meu1237 Decided December 28, 1982
Plaintiff
Defendant 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant
Cheongju District Court Decision 82Na165 delivered on May 19, 1983
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
The grounds of appeal are examined.
The theory of the lawsuit means that the judgment of the court below is contrary to the precedents of the party members in the theory of the lawsuit, and it refers to the violation of the rules of evidence in the room, and it is not a legitimate ground for appeal because it does not constitute any ground for appeal under Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc., which is contrary to the rules of evidence, and that the theory is contrary to the rules of evidence and the omission of evidence
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Lee Lee Sung-soo (Presiding Justice)