[1] The probative value of a disposal document recognized as authentic

[2] The case holding that each member was disqualified from membership by returning the membership fee to each member, in case where the golf course revealed that the member did not intend to renew the contract in accordance with the provisions of the membership agreement

[1] Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 105 of the Civil Act / [2] Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act, Article 105 of the Civil Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 2002Da23482 Decided June 28, 2002 (Gong2002Ha, 1816) Supreme Court Decision 2004Da67264, 67271 Decided May 13, 2005 (Gong2005Sang, 947)

[Plaintiff-Appellant] 1 and 4 others (Law Firm Global, Attorney Ba-won et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Hart Development Co., Ltd.

Seoul High Court Order 2007Ra121 dated November 6, 2007

All reappeals are dismissed. The costs of reappeals are borne by obligees.

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

As long as the establishment of a disposal document is recognized as authentic, the court shall recognize the existence and content of the expression of intent as stated in the disposal document, unless there is any clear and acceptable counter-proof that the content of the statement is denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2002Da23482, Jun. 28, 2002; 2004Da67264, 67271, May 13, 2005).

After citing the reasoning of the first instance court's decision, the court below held that the period of membership in the membership agreement concluded between the re-appellant and the other party is five years from the date of acquisition of qualification; however, since the Re-Appellant or the other party does not raise an objection in writing, the contract is extended under the same condition. Thus, the other party did not intend to renew the contract in writing pursuant to the above provision, and thus the other party returned the other party's membership fee to the Re-Appellant after the expiration of the period of membership qualification. In light of the above legal principles and records, the court below's fact-finding and judgment are just and acceptable, and there are no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the interpretation of the contract, interpretation of the terms and conditions, general practices, or misconception of facts or omission of judgment

Therefore, all reappeals are dismissed, and the costs of reappeals are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Si-hwan (Presiding Justice)