logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1996. 1. 12.자 95두61 결정
[소장각하명령에대한재항고][공1996.3.1.(5),677]
Main Issues

Whether the cancellation of the order may be made where the deficient stamps have been corrected after the order to dismiss the complaint was served.

Summary of Decision

After the order to dismiss the complaint has been served, the stamp which has become insufficient shall be added, and even if the objection has been filed, the rejection order shall not be revoked.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Articles 231 and 416 of the Civil Procedure Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Order 68Ma49 dated July 29, 1968 (No. 16-2, 317) Supreme Court Order 69Ma684 dated September 30, 1969 (No. 17-3, 167)

Re-appellant

Re-appellant

Other Party

The head of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government

The order of the court below

Seoul High Court Order 95Nu910 dated November 13, 1995

Text

The reappeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

The gist of the grounds of reappeal is that the re-appellant cannot prepare for the insufficient stamp amount due to the confinement in the protective custody center, and that the time limit for payment is extended, and the presiding judge's cancellation of the order of rejection of the complaint of this case is sought by seeking a postponement of the time limit for the pre-trial expenses. However, according to the record, the presiding judge of the court of the original instance finds the lack of awareness in the complaint as a result of the examination of the complaint, and issued the order to the re-appellant who raised the suit, and the re-appellant did not add the stamp within the prescribed time limit, so it can be acknowledged that the order to dismiss the complaint was issued pursuant to Article 231, Article 231, Paragraph 1 and Paragraph 2 of the Civil Procedure Act, and that the order was served on the re-appellant. Thus, even after the rejection order was served on the re-appellant, the court of the original instance cannot revoke the order with the consideration of re-appeal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 69Ma68484, etc.).

Therefore, the reappeal of this case is dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-서울고등법원 1995.11.13.자 95부910
본문참조판례