Whether only an immediate appeal may be filed against a judgment on an objection against a non-performance penalty under the Building Act (affirmative), and whether the reappeal against the decision on the appeal constitutes an immediate appeal (affirmative)

According to the provisions of Articles 83(6) and 82(4) of the Building Act, in a case where an objection is raised against a non-performance penalty imposed under Article 83 of the Building Act, a decision shall be made in accordance with the judgment of a fine for negligence under the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act. According to Article 248(3) of the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act, "the party concerned and a prosecutor may file an immediate appeal against a judgment of a fine for negligence." Thus, only an immediate appeal may be filed against a judgment of a fine for negligence. In a case where an objection against the decision of the appeal is also filed as an immediate appeal, the reappeal shall be filed within one week from the date the decision of the appeal is notified,

Articles 82(4) and 83(1) and (6) of the Building Act; Articles 23 and 248(3) of the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act; Article 444 of the Civil Procedure Act

Re-appellant

Busan District Court Order 2001Ra176 dated January 4, 2002

The reappeal is dismissed.

According to the provisions of Articles 83(6) and 82(4) of the Building Act, in a case where an objection is raised against a non-performance penalty imposed under Article 83 of the Building Act, a decision shall be made in accordance with the judgment of a fine for negligence under the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act. According to Article 248(3) of the Non-Contentious Case Litigation Procedure Act, "the party concerned and a prosecutor may file an immediate appeal against a judgment of a fine for negligence." Thus, only an immediate appeal may be filed against a judgment of a fine for negligence. Further, in a case where the reappeal against the decision of the appeal is also an immediate appeal, the reappeal against the decision of the appeal shall be filed within one week from the date the decision of the appeal is notified

The record reveals that the reappeal of this case was re-appealed against the decision of the court below that dismissed the immediate appeal made by the court below against the decision imposing a non-performance penalty in a trial as to an objection against the non-performance penalty. Thus, the reappeal of this case should also be filed within one week from the date of notification of the decision, under the above legal principles, within one week from the date of notification of the decision. However, it is clear that the reappeal of this case was re-appealed with the lapse of one week from the date of notification of the order by the court below. Thus, the ruling of the court below which dismissed the reappeal of this case on the ground of the non-performance penalty is just and without merit.

Therefore, the reappeal of this case is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Song Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)