[구상금][공1988.4.15.(822),590]
Article 320 of the Civil Procedure Act
The purport of Article 320 of the Civil Procedure Act is that in a case where a party does not comply with the order to submit a document, the court should recognize that the allegations concerning the other party’s argument regarding the document, namely, the nature, content, and the authenticity of the formation of the document, are true, and that the other party’s argument that the document intends to prove is not necessarily proven
Article 320 of the Civil Procedure Act
Supreme Court Decision 87Nu13 Decided July 7, 1987
Attorney Park Chang-chul, et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Attorney Park Young-young et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant
Seoul High Court Decision 87Na1343 delivered on August 31, 1987
All appeals are dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendants.
The defendants' attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.
1. On the fifth ground for appeal:
Article 320 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that if a party fails to comply with the order to submit a document, the court may admit that the allegations of the other party as true in the case of the other party's failure to comply with the order to submit the document, the court shall admit that the allegations of the nature, content, and authenticity of the document are true in the case of the other party's failure to comply with the order to submit the document, and that the court shall recognize that the allegations of the other party's failure to comply with the order to submit the document are true in the case of the other party's failure to comply with the order to submit the
Therefore, in this case where the plaintiff did not comply with the first instance court's order for the payment of medical expenses of the plaintiff and the defendant Kim Young-young as to the traffic accident of this case, each agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant Kim Young-young on compensation for vehicle damages between the plaintiff and the defendant Kim Young-young, each agreement on compensation for vehicle damages between the plaintiff and the defendant Kim Young-young, and the first instance court's order for the payment of medical expenses of the defendant Kim Young-young's injury, the court below did not accept this order. Since the plaintiff paid compensation to the defendants after the accident of this case, the plaintiff renounced all rights arising from the accident of this case between the plaintiff and the defendant, and agreed not to file a civil or criminal lawsuit or objection, the lawsuit of this case which is brought against the above agreement shall be dismissed as illegal, without any evidence to prove that the plaintiff expressed his/her intent to the above purport to the defendants, and the rejection of the above order is justified (the purport of each of the above documents by the defendant is that the defendants suffered damages due to the traffic accident of this case, and therefore, the plaintiff's appeal No. 2881).
2. On the first to fourth points:
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below, the non-party 1, who is the driver of the non-party 1, who is the non-party 5's 15 tons of the above 8-party 1, was not liable for damages due to the non-party 5's fault, or the non-party 1, who is the non-party 5's driver of the above 15-party 1, on July 16, 1985. The non-party 1, who is the non-party 5's driver's office, was not liable for damages due to the non-party 8's fault on the non-party 1, the non-party 5's 8-party 1, who was not liable for damages due to the non-party 1's fault on the non-party 5's surface and the non-party 2's 7-party 1, who was not liable for damages due to the non-party 1's fault on the non-party 1, and the above 5-party 1,
3. 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 judges.
Justices Yellow-il (Presiding Justice)