A. Criteria for determining whether an appellant is a disadvantageous judgment

(b) The case holding that there is no benefit in the appeal since the first instance court won the whole portion in substance;

A. An appeal may be filed only against a judgment unfavorable to the appellant himself, and whether the judgment is disadvantageous to the appellant shall be determined at the time of the filing of the appeal on the basis of the text of the judgment as the standard.

(b) The case holding that there is no benefit in the appeal since the first instance court won the whole portion in substance.

Article 360 of the Civil Procedure Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 83Da515 delivered on October 25, 1983 (Gong1983, 1742) (Gong1983, 1742) 91Da40696 delivered on March 27, 1992 (Gong1992, 1389) 92Da33008 delivered on June 25, 1993 (Gong193Ha, 2100)

[Defendant-Appellee] Lee Jong-dae, Inc., Ltd. and one other, Counsel for defendant-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellant-appellee-appellant

Hyundai General Commercial Co., Ltd., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant and six others

Seoul High Court Decision 92Na64073 delivered on March 24, 1994

The judgment of the court below is reversed. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal and appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Ex officio, the appeal filed by the plaintiff is examined.

An appeal may be filed only against a judgment unfavorable to an appellant, and whether a judgment is disadvantageous to appellant shall be determined based on the standard of the text of the judgment at the time of the appeal (see Supreme Court Decision 83Da515 delivered on October 25, 1983).

According to the records, the plaintiff was paid an amount of 586,412,830 won to the defendant from December 4, 1987 to the date of full payment, and requested to implement the procedure for registration of cancellation of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage as to the real estate of this case. The court of first instance did not order the plaintiff to dismiss the above amount of 586,412,830 won and the above amount of 6% per annum from December 4, 1987 to October 2, 1992 (the above amount of 756,360,087 won = 586,412,830 won + 586,412,830 won and the above amount of 586,412,830 won as to the real estate of this case, and the court below did not order the plaintiff to dismiss the registration of establishment of a mortgage of this case more clearly than the above amount of 70 million won. Thus, the court below did not order the plaintiff to dismiss the above part of the plaintiff's appeal.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which did not require further determination as to the grounds of appeal should not be reversed, since the court below's decision was unlawful as it entered this part and sentenced the dismissal of appeal.

Therefore, a party member shall dismiss the plaintiff's appeal by the unanimous opinion of all participating Justices, and it shall be decided directly pursuant to Article 407 subparagraph 1 of the Civil Procedure Act, and the costs of appeal and appeal shall be borne by the losing plaintiff. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Justices Ahn Yong-sik (Presiding Justice)