Whether Article 422(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act falls under Article 422(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act where a judge who has participated in a new trial or its appellate trial (negative)

Even if a judge who has participated in a trial of appeal or a trial of appeal which has been lodged by a retrial has participated in the trial of retrial, it shall not be applicable to cases where a judge who is unable to participate in the trial under Article 422 (1) 2

Article 422(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act

Mailsung

Park Young-soo et al.

Edives

Supreme Court Order 89Jais12 Dated August 27, 1990

The quasi-examination application is dismissed.

The grounds for applying for quasi-deliberation by the defendant (the applicant for quasi-adjudication, the applicant for quasi-adjudication, and the defendant hereinafter) shall be considered.

Although the defendant asserts that the decision subject to quasi-examination falls under Article 422(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act, even if the judge, who was involved in the trial of appeal or the trial of appeal, participated in the trial, does not fall under the case where the judge is not involved in the trial under Article 422(1)2 of the Civil Procedure Act, so the plaintiff's ground for quasi-examination is groundless.

In addition, although the defendant is stipulated in Article 422 (1) 6 and 10 of the Civil Procedure Act among the claims for quasi-examination, there are no specific grounds for it, and there are no data to recognize that there are such grounds for quasi-examination even after examining the record.

As a result, the quasi-examination application of this case is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice) Lee Jong-won (Presiding Justice)