beta
Case Number of the immediately preceding lawsuit
Supreme Court Decision 2013Du203 (No. 22, 2013)
Title
If a ground of appeal is not examined because it falls under a ground of non-trial conduct, there is no omission of judgment, and it does not constitute grounds of appeal.
Summary
If a ground of appeal is not examined because it falls under a ground of non-trial conduct, there is no omission of judgment, and it does not constitute grounds of appeal.
Cases
2013dudu289 Disposition of revocation of imposition of capital gains tax
Plaintiff (Reexamination Plaintiff)
Park AA
Defendant (Re-Defendant)
The Director of the National Tax Service
Judgment Subject to Judgment
Supreme Court Decision 2013Du203 Decided August 22, 2013
Imposition of Judgment
January 23, 2014
Text
The request for retrial is dismissed.
The litigation costs for retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Reasons
We examine the reasons for the request for retrial.
It argues that there are errors prescribed in Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Property or the reason for omitting judgment prescribed in Article 451(9) of the Civil Procedure
On the other hand, a lawsuit for a retrial against a final judgment of an administrative case may be brought only when there exist grounds provided for in each subparagraph of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, which shall apply mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act. Thus, the reason that there was an error provided for in Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal in the Judgment subject to a retrial does not constitute legitimate grounds for retrial, and furthermore, the judgment dismissing a final appeal without examining further grounds for appeal on the ground that the assertion on the grounds of final appeal constitutes a ground for final appeal under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act cannot be deemed as grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Nu176, Feb. 13, 196).
Therefore, the retrial is dismissed, and the costs of retrial are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.