logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1971. 3. 4.자 71마89 결정
[보정명령에대한재항고][집19(1)민,115]
Main Issues

An immediate appeal may not be filed against the order to correct the complaint itself.

Summary of Judgment

An immediate appeal may not be filed against the order of correction in accordance with the presiding judge’s petition of appeal.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 409 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Re-appellant

Name of the Republic of Korea:

Seoul High Court Order 70Na3380 dated January 17, 1971, and Order 70Na3380 dated January 27, 1971

Text

On January 17, 1971, the re-appeal against the order of correction by the presiding judge of the original court shall be dismissed.

On January 27, 1971, the re-appeal against the order to dismiss the petition of appeal by the presiding judge of the original court is dismissed.

Reasons

An immediate appeal may be filed against the order of correction issued by the presiding judge pursuant to the presiding judge of Article 231 of the Civil Procedure Act, which applies mutatis mutandis under Article 371 of the same Act, because the appellant refuses to comply with the order of rejection of the petition of appeal. Therefore, the reappeal against the order of correction cannot be filed against the order of correction itself. Thus, the reappeal against the order of correction is illegal, and it cannot be seen that it is defective. Therefore, the reappeal against the order of correction is dismissed without the need to explain the grounds of reappeal.

In addition, according to the records, the court below ordered the re-appellant to correct 25,078 won in the amount below as of January 14, 1971 as of January 14, 1971 because the re-appellant did not attach the stamps as prescribed by the law, and the order of correction was not made within five days as of January 17, 197, despite the lawful delivery to the re-appellant, so it is clear that the court below dismissed the petition of appeal on the ground of this reason. Therefore, the court below's ruling is just, and without the need to give an explanation of the grounds of reappeal, the reappeal as to this part

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Park Jae-dong (Presiding Judge)

arrow