Whether the judgment of the court below recognizes facts without evidence or the allegation that there are illegal grounds for incomplete hearing constitutes grounds for appeal of right.

The grounds of appeal are limited to the assertion of violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, and they do not fall under any of the subparagraphs of Article 11(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which provides for the grounds of appeal of rights.

Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Promotion of Legal Proceedings

Supreme Court Decision 82Da232, 82Meu525 Decided September 14, 1982, Supreme Court Decision 83Da679 Decided February 28, 1984

Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and one other

Daegu District Court Decision 87Na456 delivered on November 13, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The gist of the grounds of appeal is that there is an error of finding facts without evidence in the judgment of the court below, and there is an error of incomplete deliberation and omission of judgment.

However, the judgment of the court below is merely an assertion of violation of law, and it does not constitute a ground under any subparagraph of Article 11 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which prescribes the grounds for the recognition of rights (see Supreme Court Decision 82Da232, 82Meu525 delivered on September 14, 1982; Supreme Court Decision 83Da679 delivered on February 28, 1984).

Although the Supreme Court's decision cited in the argument that the above error violated the law of the court, the plaintiff alleged that it violated the law of the court below without any evidence or erred in the violation of the rules of evidence by misunderstanding the determination of evidence (Supreme Court Decision 81Da142 delivered on April 27, 1982), and there was an error in the rules of evidence and incomplete hearing (Supreme Court Decision 62Da142 delivered on June 21, 1962), and there was an error in the rules of evidence and incomplete hearing (Supreme Court Decision 81Da412 delivered on February 9, 1982) and the omission of judgment (Supreme Court Decision 82Da373 delivered on August 24, 1982). However, the reason like the plaintiff's head is not a interpretation of the law of the law or the disposition, and therefore, the interpretation of the law of the law, the rules, or the disposition is inconsistent with the Supreme Court's precedents, and therefore, it is not justified.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Ansan-man (Presiding Justice)