logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2019.07.24 2018재두314
도시관리계획결정 무효등
Text

All requests for retrial are dismissed.

The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff (Plaintiffs for retrial).

Reasons

The grounds for request for retrial shall be examined.

1. As to the grounds for a retrial under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act, the grounds for a retrial are relevant to the fact-finding itself among the grounds for a retrial, and for instance, as to the false statement by a witness, expert witness, interpreter or legal representative under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act or the false statement by a party or legal representative, the grounds for a retrial against the judgment by the fact-finding court cannot be the grounds for a retrial against the judgment by the court of final appeal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 9Da746, Apr. 11, 200). Therefore, the argument on the grounds for a retrial

2. The grounds of appeal as to the grounds of appeal on the grounds of retrial under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act and Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act are deemed to fall under the grounds of continuous deliberation under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act, and there is no omission in determination as to the grounds of appeal on the dismissal of a final appeal without further deliberation. Thus, there is no ground of appeal under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act (see Supreme Court Decision 96Da479, May 7, 1997). Thus, there is no ground of retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a final appeal, which dismissed the final appeal on the ground that it falls under the grounds

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

arrow