Whether the withdrawal of confession as to the authenticity of the documentary evidence should be dealt with together with the revocation of confession as to the principal facts (affirmative)

Confessions as to the authenticity of documentary evidence are related to the fact of assistance, however, as to the revocation of confessions, unlike the case of revocation of confessions as to other indirect facts, the confessions as to the principal facts shall be treated together with the revocation of confessions as to the principal facts.

Article 261 of the Civil Procedure Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellee)

The fixed interference of the plaintiffs et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant in charge of the affairs of the Seo-gu General Law Office

Hong Madern et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Incheon District Court Decision 90Na1038 delivered on August 24, 1990

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendants.

1. Judgment on the Defendants’ legal representative’ ground of appeal No. 1

Although confessions as to the authenticity of documentary evidence are related to the fact of assistance, unlike the case of revocation of confessions as to other indirect facts, it is a view that the precedents of party members take effect to the effect that the confessions should be treated equally as the revocation of confessions as to the principal facts (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 67Da225, Apr. 4, 1967; 88Meu3083, Dec. 20, 1980); and therefore, there is no reason to discuss the above.

2. Determination on the ground of appeal No. 2

The judgment of the court below as to the point out of the theory of lawsuit is justified in light of the relation of evidence as stated by the court below, and it cannot be viewed that there is no proper trial like the theory of lawsuit or there is an error of law in violation of the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence. In the end, it is nothing more than criticism of the selection of evidence and the recognition of facts belonging to the whole jurisdiction of the court below

3. Therefore, all appeals by the Defendants are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants who have lost them. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)