The case holding that the small amount of claim is not a legitimate ground for appeal

In order to file an appeal on the grounds that the Supreme Court made a judgment contrary to the Supreme Court's precedents regarding small claims under the Trial of Small Claims Act, any part of the original judgment should be specifically indicated in the Supreme Court's precedents. Therefore, if the court below asserted that there was a conflicting judgment in the Supreme Court's precedents and did not specify the grounds for appeal, it cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal.

Article 3 of the Trial of Small Claims Act

Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and two others

Chuncheon District Court Decision 79Na103 delivered on April 11, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

This case is a small-sum case under the Trial of Small Claims Act, so it is necessary to point out in detail what parts of the original judgment conflict with the Supreme Court's precedents in order to make an appeal on the grounds that the Supreme Court's precedents under the same Act conflict with each other.

However, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench, on the ground that the court below made a judgment contrary to the precedents, and did not specifically state the reasons therefor, and thus, it cannot be accepted as a legitimate ground for appeal under the same Act. (The appellate brief submitted on June 14, 1980 is not submitted within a legitimate period.)

Justices Yang Ho-ho (Presiding Justice)