Part of the evidence which is rejected at the time of fact-finding based on comprehensive evidence (negative)

In a case where a fact-finding court conducts fact-finding by compiling the evidence, it shall eliminate contradictory parts and unnecessary parts of each evidence and gather only the necessary and common parts among them and use them as judgment materials. Thus, it is reasonable to view that the value of evidence is unjustifiable even if there is no express statement that the court does not adopt any part contrary to the facts acknowledged by the court among the contents of evidence, unless there are special evidences such as disposition documents, etc., and therefore, the court did not specify the purport of rejecting the part inconsistent with the facts among the evidence, or did not explain the reasons for rejection.

Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 80Da3198 delivered on March 8, 198 (Gong1983, 646) Supreme Court Decision 93Da18129 delivered on November 12, 1993 (Gong1994Sang, 89) Supreme Court Decision 94Da4677 delivered on August 26, 1994 (Gong194Ha, 2523) Supreme Court Decision 95Da28274 delivered on February 9, 1996 (the same purport)

[Judgment of the court below] The court below held that the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the registration of the court below.

Defendant (Attorney Lee Young-chul, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Jeju District Court Decision 94Na750 delivered on May 26, 1995

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The court below rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the transfer registration of ownership in the name of the defendant on the land of this case was a registration under the plaintiff's title trust, based on the records, and therefore, it is reasonable in light of the records. It cannot be deemed that the court below committed an unlawful act of misunderstanding the facts due to an incomplete hearing or a violation of the rules of evidence that failed to perform the duty of explanation as alleged in the grounds of appeal, or a violation of the rules of evidence, or an incomplete hearing. In addition, where the court of fact-finding comprehensively conducts the fact-finding based on the evidence, it shall remove contradictory and unnecessary parts of each evidence, gather necessary and common parts, and use them as judgment materials. Thus, it is reasonable to see that the court of fact-finding did not adopt any evidence that is inconsistent with the facts acknowledged by the court, unless there is a special evidence such as a disposal document, and therefore, it is reasonable to see that the value of evidence is unlawful (see Supreme Court Decision 80Da3198, Mar. 8, 1983).

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

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)