Article 237 of the Company Reorganization Act provides that "an immediate appeal may be filed against the decision to approve the reorganization plan" (paragraph (1)), and that "the provisions of Paragraph (3) above shall apply mutatis mutandis to an appeal under the provisions of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act applied mutatis mutandis under Article 8 ( Paragraph (4))," it is interpreted that a reappeal against the decision to approve the reorganization plan is not allowed and only a special appeal under Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act applied mutatis mutandis under Article 8 of the Company Reorganization Act is allowed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 87Du277, Dec. 29, 1987). The re-appellant filed a reappeal by asserting that there is an objection against the decision to approve the reorganization plan, which shall be judged as a special appeal.

According to Article 420(2) and (3) of the Civil Procedure Act, the period of special appeal is one week, which is a peremptory term. According to the records, the re-appellant was notified of the order of the court below on September 23, 1989 and submitted the re-appeal of this case to the court on October 1, 1989 following the lapse of one week from that date.

Therefore, the reappeals' reappeals' reappeals' reappeals' reappeals' reappeals' assertion to dismiss all of the appeals is obvious that the defects cannot be corrected and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)