In a case where a district court and its branch court shall judge a case to be tried in the first instance by a single judge of the district court and its branch court, and the appellate case on the first instance case was tried by the collegiate panel of the district court into an entity of the principal court, the case reversed the appellate court judgment and its first instance judgment and transferred it to the collegiate panel of the district court having jurisdiction.

The case where the judgment of the court below and the judgment of the court of first instance are reversed ex officio and the judgment of the court of first instance are transferred to the collegiate panel of the district court having jurisdiction over the case, on the ground that it is obvious that the legislative purport of the jurisdiction system (the principle of date of issuance of jurisdiction) and its illegality have influenced the judgment, where the court of first instance and the collegiate panel of the district court have judged the case to be tried in the first instance as the first instance court, and the appellate case on the first instance case has been tried in the appellate court as to the case into the substance by the collegiate panel of the court of first instance without jurisdiction.

Article 394 of the Criminal Procedure Act; Article 32(1)3 of the Court Organization Act; Article 281(1) of the Criminal Act

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

Defendant

Defendant

Chuncheon District Court Decision 9No458 delivered on September 16, 1999

All the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of first instance are reversed, and the case shall be transferred to the Chuncheon District Court Panel Division.

Judgment ex officio is made.

According to the records, the facts charged of this case against the defendant is that the defendant committed a crime of violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act and a crime of bodily injury resulting from confinement, and it is evident that the original court's original court's original court's original court's original court's original court's original court's original court's original court's appellate court's original court's original court's judgment against

However, according to the main sentence of Article 32 (1) 3 of the Court Organization Act, the first instance court on the crime of bodily injury resulting from confinement is the collegiate division of the district court and its branch court. Thus, according to the jurisdiction of the high court and its branch court under [Attachment 3] of Article 4 of the Act on the Establishment and Management of Courts and its branch court and its branch court, in this case, the collegiate division of the Chuncheon District Court and its branch court have the first instance judgment authority in this case, and the appeal case has the judgment authority in the Seoul High Court.

Therefore, the court below's decision and the first instance court's decision as to this case's substance are excessive and judged without jurisdiction. Thus, the court below's decision and the first instance court's decision were erroneous in violation of the law of litigation procedure, and it is obvious that this affected the judgment in light of the legislative purport of the jurisdiction system (the principle of the date of issuance of jurisdiction) and the gravity of its illegality (see Supreme Court Decision 96Do2789, Apr. 8, 197). It ex officio reverses the judgment of the court below and the first instance court's decision, and it is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating judges to transfer the case to the Chuncheon District Court's Panel Division

Justices Song Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)