Omission of determination as a mistake in the content of judgment and grounds for retrial

"Omission of judgment" under Article 422 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act refers to a case in which judgment is not indicated among the reasons for the judgment on the matter that naturally affects the conclusion of the judgment by means of an attack and defense that is legitimately submitted by the parties to the case, and even if there is a fault in domestic affairs or a failure to explain the reasons in detail, it shall not be deemed a omission of judgment under the above Act.

Article 422(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 80Da30 Delivered on April 12, 1983

Plaintiff

Defendant 1, Defendant 1 et al.

Supreme Court Decision 82Da20 Delivered on December 28, 1982

The retrial lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs for retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff for retrial.

The grounds for retrial of the plaintiff shall be examined.

The gist of the plaintiff's request for retrial of this case is that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for retrial, such as the name of house, etc., with the Seoul Civil District Court, but the Supreme Court ruled on October 30, 1979 against the plaintiff for retrial (Supreme Court Decision 79Da1571 Decided September 29, 1982). Only after September 29, 1982, the plaintiff for retrial had known that there was an error of omission of judgment under Article 422 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act of the Supreme Court's final judgment, and on this ground, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit for retrial of the above Supreme Court's final judgment (Supreme Court Decision 82Da20) with the Supreme Court on October 28, 198, and the Supreme Court did not err in the misunderstanding of the Supreme Court's judgment of December 28, 192, and thus, the plaintiff excluded the above Supreme Court's request for retrial from 200 days after being served with the original copy of the judgment.

On the other hand, the "when a judgment was omitted on important matters that might affect the judgment" under Article 422 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act refers to the case where a party does not indicate any judgment among the reasons for the judgment concerning the facts that naturally affect the conclusion of the judgment as a matter of course by means of attack and defense that has been legitimately submitted by the party in a lawsuit, and even if there were errors in the contents of the judgment or did not explain the reasons in detail, it shall not be deemed a deviation from the judgment under the above provision. (See Supreme Court Decision 80Da30 delivered on April 12, 1983) In this case, even according to the plaintiff's above assertion itself, it shall not be deemed a deviation from the judgment under the above provision (see Supreme Court Decision 80Da30 delivered on April 12, 1983). It is clear

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed. The costs of the lawsuit of this case are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Shin Jong-young (Presiding Justice)