The meaning of "when the false statement of a witness becomes evidence of a judgment" under Article 422 (1) 7 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Article 422(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act provides a witness’s false statement, which is a ground for retrial as provided for in Article 422(1)7 of the same Act, as a fact-finding material that affects the text of judgment. If there is a probable probability that the text of judgment would vary if the false statement had not been made, then only the remaining evidence except the false statement may have any effect on the text of judgment, it does not constitute a ground for retrial even if the false statement was received a final judgment of conviction due to perjury.

Article 422(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 81Da85 delivered on June 23, 1981, 81Da1319 delivered on March 22, 1983

Dominical music

Presenters

Daejeon District Court Decision 86Na1 delivered on January 14, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendant (Plaintiffs for retrial).

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 422(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act provides a witness’s false statement, which is a ground for retrial as provided for in Article 422(1)7 of the same Act, as a fact-finding material that affects the text of judgment. If there is a probable probability that if there was no false statement, the text of judgment would change if there would be no such false statement. Thus, if only the remaining evidence except the false statement does not have any influence on the text of judgment, it does not constitute a ground for retrial even if the witness’s false statement was pronounced guilty due to a false statement, it does not constitute a ground for retrial.

According to the judgment of the court below, the court below dismissed the lawsuit for retrial of this case on the ground that the Non-party's statement in the judgment of the court below does not affect the conclusion of the judgment subject to retrial even if the Non-party's statement in the judgment of the court below did not constitute a ground for retrial even if the Non-party's statement in the judgment of the court below did not constitute a ground for retrial, although it is clear that the Non-party's testimony in the judgment of the court below was adopted and provided as one of comprehensive evidence, but even if there was no part of testimony in the judgment of conviction

In light of the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are just, and there is no error of law such as misconception of facts due to violation of the rules of evidence such as the theory of lawsuit. We are without merit.

Therefore, 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.

Justices Man-hee (Presiding Justice)