[항소장각하명령에대한재항고][집18(2)민,166]
The presiding judge of the appellate court may not make it invalid because he issued an order to correct the small amount of stamp due to a mistake in calculating the shortage of stamp to be attached to the petition of appeal.
The presiding judge of the appellate court issued an order to correct the smaller amount of money due to a mistake in calculating the insufficient amount of revenue to be attached to the petition of appeal, and the order of the presiding judge dismissed the petition of appeal in a case where the appellant fails to correct the smaller amount of revenue within the amended period, the order of the presiding judge is justifiable. And the provisions of Article 14 of the former Act on the Stamps Attached for Civil Litigation, Etc. (wholly amended by Act No. 4299 of Dec. 31, 90) refers to a case where justifiable correction is made in accordance with the order of correction.
Article 371 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 231 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 14 of the Act on the Stamps Attached for Civil Litigation
Re-appellant
Other Party
Seoul High Court Order 70Ra1062 delivered on May 28, 1970
The reappeal is dismissed.
Re-appellant's re-appellant's ground for reappeal.
According to the records, the re-appellant submitted a petition of appeal on April 3, 1970. Since the value of the subject matter of lawsuit is KRW 6,405,00,00, which is to be attached to the petition of appeal, and KRW 100 was attached to the petition of appeal, the presiding judge of the appellate court issued an order of correction to correct 64,590 won within 5 days from the date of delivery, which stated that it should be corrected within 6,90 won from May 16, 1970, and this order was sent to the re-appellant on the 28th of the same month without correction, and this order was sent to the re-appellant on the 31th of the same month. Since the re-appellant did not supplement the amount of 6,990 won as stated in the order of the presiding judge on June 1, 196, it cannot be interpreted that the court of appeals did not correct the amount of the new order of correction because it is insufficient for the court of appeal to correct it.
Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Park Jae-dong (Presiding Judge)