Cases where the Do has acknowledged the cancellation of the agreement of the sales contract by the testimony of an imminently reliable testimony

Cases where the Do has acknowledged the cancellation of the agreement of the sales contract by the testimony of an imminently reliable testimony

Article 543 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 60No1457 delivered on December 1, 1961, Seoul High Court Decision 201Da1457 delivered on December 1, 201

the original judgment shall be reversed.

The case shall be remanded to Seoul High Court.

The plaintiff's attorney and the plaintiff's respective grounds for appeal are as stated in the grounds for appeal attached in the attached Form, and the answers of the defendant and the defendant's intervenor's representative are as stated in the subsequent written response.

The court below's decision that recognized the cancellation of the above real estate sales contract between the plaintiff and the non-party 4 was against the rules of evidence. The court below's decision that the non-party 1, the non-party 2, and the non-party 3's testimony was stated in the non-party 7 and the non-party 4's statement that the non-party 4's testimony was non-party 7 and the non-party 4's testimony was non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party 1's non-party witness's non-party 4's non-party's non-party 4's non-party's non-party witness's non-party 4's non-party's non-party's non-party's non-party 4's non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party's non-party's non-party 1's non-party 4's non-party's non-party 4's non-party 6's testimony's non-party 4's statement.

Based on the above explanation, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all Justices who participated in the trial for new trial.

The judges of the Supreme Court, the two judges of the two judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Dog-Jak, and the Mag-man Mag-bun Lap