The Supreme Court's decision that does not specifically state the conflicting Supreme Court's decision is appropriate (negative)

The grounds of appeal that do not specify the precedents of the Supreme Court specifically do not fall under Article 11 (1) 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and thus cannot be legitimate grounds of appeal.

Article 11 (1) 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings

Supreme Court Decision 83Da469 delivered on September 27, 1983 (Dong)

[Defendant-Appellee] The Head of the Gu, the Head of the Gu, the Head of the Gu, the Head of the Gu, the Head of the Gu

Defendant

Suwon District Court Decision 82Na421 delivered on May 4, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney are examined.

The issue of violation of Acts and subordinate statutes pointing out shall not fall under any of the cases provided by Article 11 (1) 2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings and shall not be specifically stated in the Supreme Court's precedents, and each of the above grounds for appeal shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal, since it does not fall under Article 11 (1) 3 of the same Act.

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

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)