The case holding that the donation and ratification of the sale of real estate by indirect facts violated the rules of evidence due to the lack of empirical or logical rules.

The presumption that a part of the instant real estate was donated to the Defendant and sold the remaining real estate is inconsistent with the rules of experience and logic, and thus, is inconsistent with the rules of evidence. The mere fact that a 100 grave exists on the instant real estate and a 100 grave graves were established for the deceased in a rhetore and that the Defendant-si announced the opening of a grave.

Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Attorney Yoon Young-ho et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Attorney Park Jong-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Gwangju High Court Decision 88Na5 delivered on June 14, 1989

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The court below, based on the quoted evidence, held that the non-party 1 was the head of the above military finance division at the time of the above time, and owned a lot of real estate at the time of survival, Gun, Gu, Do, and Gyeongbuk's old age, etc., and that the non-party 1 had been operating the new Gun, Gun, and managed the iron house in Incheon at the time of death, and that there was a lot of death in the military production around 1946, the non-party 1 had a lot of death at the time of the above 5th anniversary of the fact that the above 19th anniversary of the above 196, the non-party 1 had a lot of death after cremation and the above 9th of the 19th of the 19th of the 19th of the 19th of the 19th of the 19th of the 19th of the 19th of the 196th of the 196th of the 196th of the 10th of the 10th of the death.

However, each evidence cited by the court below did not contain any content that the deceased Kim Jong-sung donated and sold the real estate in this case to the defendant before its birth.

In addition, according to the evidence of the court below's personnel, the real estate of this case is not a common cemetery designated by the defendant Si, but a body was buried in this place after cremationing the body of the deceased in around 1946 due to the relation where the common cemetery of the defendant Si was adjacent to the real estate of this case and there was a common cemetery of the defendant Si. The above Kim Tae-tae, who was a Sil-si, was a Sil-si, was not asked by the heir, including the above deceased or the plaintiff, but was provided as such to the deceased, and the ownership transfer transfer registration was made to the defendant Si. The facts acknowledged by the court below, namely, the fact that there were 10 or more graves on the real estate of this case was established for the deceased, and that there was a public announcement of the opening of the grave, and it is difficult to conclude that the above Kim Jong-sung donated the real estate of this case to the defendant and sold it to the second real estate at the time of the defendant.

After all, the court below found facts without evidence or confirmed ratification that does not comply with the rule of experience or logic, and it constitutes Article 12 (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Gwangju High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Yong-dong (Presiding Justice)