In the appellate court over a single case, even if it has been extended to the claim that belongs to the jurisdiction of the collegiate panel, it shall not affect the jurisdiction.

In the appellate court over a single case, even if it has been extended to the claim that belongs to the jurisdiction of the collegiate panel, it shall not affect the jurisdiction.

Article 29 of the Court Organization Act

Plaintiff (Attorney Kim Associate-won, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

[Judgment of the court below]

Seoul Civil History District Court Decision 67Na1029 delivered on March 20, 1970

All appeals are dismissed.

Each costs of appeal shall be borne by each appellant.

As to the ground of appeal No. 1 by the Plaintiff’s attorney

Based on the evidence stated in the original judgment, we cannot agree with the judgment on the existence of the theory lease contract in the original judgment, and it cannot be readily concluded that there was an error in the process of its recognition, and it cannot be readily concluded that there was an error in the judgment on the original judgment in the absence of recognition of the rescission of the theory by deeming that the term of the lease has

On the ground of appeal No. 2 by the Plaintiff and the ground of appeal No. 2 and 3 by the Defendant’s attorney, based on evidence established in the original judgment against the Defendant’s ground of appeal No. 2 and 2 and 3, it cannot be recognized that the Defendant’s possession of the theory of lawsuit No. 215 of the original judgment was in violation of the rules of evidence in the theory of lawsuit, and according to the purport of the pleading before the pleadings, the Plaintiff was recognized to have renounced the damages on the

The issue is either groundless or groundless.

As to Defendant’s attorney’s ground of appeal No. 1

Even though the appeal has been filed to the collegiate panel of the district court with respect to a single case, it has been extended to the claim that belongs to the jurisdiction of the collegiate panel in the appellate court, it is not affected by the jurisdiction, and there is no illegality by making an adjudication on the expanded claim in the appellate court.

The issue is groundless.

Therefore, according to Articles 400, 395, and 384 of the Civil Procedure Act, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

The two judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) the Red Net Sheet