Whether a mistake in the content of a judgment constitutes grounds for retrial, “when a judgment was omitted on important matters that affect the judgment,” which is grounds for retrial (negative)

Article 422 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "when a judgment on important matters that may affect the judgment has been omitted" refers to the case where a judgment is not indicated in the grounds of the judgment concerning the facts that have an influence on the conclusion of the judgment by an attack or defense which the party has lawfully submitted in a lawsuit, and by the defense method, the judgment is not indicated among the grounds of the judgment. Even if there was an error in the contents of the

Article 422(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 73Da54 Delivered on June 11, 1974

[Judgment of the court below]

Defendant Kim Jong-il, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Supreme Court Decision 81Meu61 Decided February 23, 1982

The retrial lawsuit is dismissed.

Litigation costs incurred in a retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds for retrial of the plaintiff (limited to the plaintiff, hereinafter the plaintiff) and his/her attorney are examined.

Article 422 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "when a judgment on important matters that may affect the judgment has been omitted" refers to the case where a party does not indicate a judgment among the reasons for the judgment on matters that naturally affect the conclusion of the judgment by means of an attack and defense that has been legitimately submitted by the party in a lawsuit, and even if there were errors in the contents of the judgment, it shall not be deemed a deviation from judgment as referred to in the above Article of the Act (see Supreme Court Decision 73No54 delivered on June 11, 1974). Thus, considering the reasons for the judgment subject to retrial in comparison with the reasons for the judgment in the appellate brief, the judgment subject to retrial cannot be deemed an unlawful determination of the grounds for appeal on important matters that affect the judgment, because it is apparent that the judgment subject to review clearly states the judgment on all the grounds for appeal, and the reasons for the request for retrial cannot be deemed to be an unjustifiable dispute by neglecting another explanation of the previous grounds for appeal. This cannot be seen as falling under a deviation from judgment for the reasons

Therefore, a lawsuit for retrial is dismissed without merit. The costs of the lawsuit for retrial are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Kim Young-ju (Presiding Justice)