[소유권보존등기말소등][공1991.8.15.(902),2006]
A. The legitimacy of the measure that the lower court rejected the Plaintiff’s claim and did not determine on the counterclaim in case the Defendant brought a counterclaim on a conditional basis in preparation for the case where the Plaintiff’s claim on the principal lawsuit is accepted (affirmative)
B. In the case of paragraph (a) above, the defendant's appeal is appropriate (negative)
A. Where the defendant brought a counterclaim on a conditional basis in preparation for the case where the plaintiff's claim for main lawsuit is accepted, it is justifiable that the court below rejected the plaintiff's claim for main lawsuit, as long as it did not judge the counterclaim
B. In the case of paragraph (a) above, the Defendant’s appeal against this is unlawful as it does not exist.
A. Article 242 of the Civil Procedure Act
Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) Law Firm Woo, Attorney Park Jong-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-Counterclaim defendant-appellant-appellant)
Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Attorney Lee Dong-il et al., Counsel for the defendant-Counterclaim plaintiff-appellant)
Seoul High Court Decision 90Na39103, 39110 (Counterclaim) decided December 7, 1990
The appeal shall be dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).
We examine the grounds of appeal.
According to the records, it is clear that the defendant filed the counterclaim of this case on condition that the plaintiff's claim for the counterclaim of this case is accepted. Thus, as long as the court below rejected the plaintiff's claim for the counterclaim of this case, it is just in which the court below did not decide on the counterclaim of this case, and its appeal
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Yong-sung (Presiding Justice)