Whether the statement in other documents can be invoked as a ground for re-appeal (negative)

The grounds of re-appeal should be expressed in a manner that directly states in the re-appeal or re-appeal form, and it cannot be invoked as the content of other written statements. Therefore, the grounds of re-appeal of re-appellant who has invoked other written statements are not legitimate grounds of re-appeal.

Articles 397 and 413 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Order 82Ma777 Decided December 22, 1982 (Gong1983, 416) Supreme Court Order 87Ma689 Decided August 29, 1987 (Gong1987, 1543) (Gong1987, 1709) Decided October 13, 1987

Daedo Construction Co., Ltd.

Seoul High Court Order 99Ra13 dated February 11, 1999

The reappeal is dismissed.

The re-appellant did not submit the re-appeal separately and stated that the re-appeal ground is only re-appeal for the same reason as the ground for the re-appeal filed by the re-appellant.

However, the grounds for re-appeal should be expressed in a manner that directly states in the re-appeal petition or the re-appeal petition, and cannot be invoked the contents of other written statements (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 87Ma689, Aug. 29, 1987). The re-appellant's grounds for re-appeal, which invoked other written statements, cannot be deemed legitimate grounds for re-appeal.

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 Lee Yong-hun (Presiding Justice)