beta
Main Issues
In case of an incomplete hearing on whether or not there is a benefit of action, it is an error of law.
Summary of Judgment
If a lease contract subject to a disposition of revocation is terminated and cannot continue to exist, the plaintiff has no interest in maintaining the lawsuit, unless there is a special reason to the contrary.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 393 of the Civil Procedure Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Decision 63Nu140 Delivered on May 12, 1964
Plaintiff-Appellee
Plaintiff
Defendant-Appellant
The head of the Nowon-gu Tax Office
Intervenor joining the Defendant
Defendant 1 and 16 others
original decision
Seoul High Court Decision 67Gu161 delivered on October 22, 1968
Text
The original judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
Reasons
As to the assertion that the lease contract on the real estate held by the plaintiff among the second points of appeal No. 2 by the defendant and the supplementary intervenor for the defendant cannot continue to exist, the lease contract on the real estate held by the plaintiff cannot be concluded on July 9, 1957 with the plaintiff and the non-party 1 and the non-party 2, and the contract on the lease with the defendant and the non-party 2 was cancelled on June 24, 1963, and the contract was concluded under the non-party 3's sole name. According to the statement of Article 2 of the contract on the lease of the property held by the non-party 41 without dispute between the parties adopted by the original judgment, the effective period of the contract shall be one year counting from the date of conclusion of the contract, and the contract shall be deemed to have been renewed under the same condition without any special opinion expressed by the plaintiff 1 and the non-party 1 and the non-party 2, the contract shall be deemed to have been renewed under the same condition, and thus, the defendant shall be deemed to have no special reasons for cancellation of the contract 97.
Therefore, the decision on the issue of a remote appeal is omitted, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Kimchi-bi (Presiding Judge)