Main Issues
Whether the reason why the damage of the applicant and the case related to this case are being tried in another court is a transfer ground to avoid damage or delay.
Summary of Judgment
Since the petitioner takes a large amount of cost and time to conduct a lawsuit, or the related case is tried separately in other courts, it cannot be deemed that there is a ground for transfer to avoid damage or delay solely on the basis that there is a concern for a different judgment to be sentenced due to a different conclusion
[Reference Provisions]
Article 32 of the Civil Procedure Act
Reference Cases
Supreme Court Order 66Ma337 Dated June 8, 1966 Dated March 17, 1965
Applicant and Re-Appellant
Attorney Park Jae-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant
Respondent
[Judgment of the court below] Defendant 1 and 3 others
Original Decision
Daegu High Court Order 79Ra17 decided November 7, 1979
Text
The reappeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The grounds for re-appeal of the applicant are examined.
Even in the above litigation case (79Ahap1040 case) in which the respondent filed a claim for damages against the petitioner, the Busan District Court 79Gahap1040 case filed against the respondent, and the case in which the subject matter of the lawsuit is identical to that of the petitioner, the Busan District Court 79Gahap9169 case, also has jurisdiction over the Busan District Court (79Gahap1040 case), it cannot be concluded that there is a concern that there is a different judgment due to the fact that there is a concern that there is a concern that there is a different judgment due to the petitioner's considerable cost and time in the performance of the lawsuit, or both courts. Therefore, it cannot be concluded that there is a cause for a significant loss or delay in the lawsuit under Article 32 of the Civil Procedure Act. Therefore, the court below cannot find the ground for transfer under the above provision of the Civil Procedure Act to the purport that the court below cannot find the ground for transfer under the same purport and maintained
Therefore, the reappeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Sap-ho (Presiding Justice)