logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017.07.18 2016재두501
위천면지창간호발행처분 일부효력부존재확인
Text

The request for retrial is dismissed.

The litigation costs for retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Reasons

The grounds for request for retrial shall be examined.

The gist of the grounds for a retrial is that there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)1, 3, and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial.

First of all, in relation to the argument that there exists a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act (when a judgment on important matters that may affect a judgment is omitted), if an argument on the grounds for appeal is dismissed on the ground of appeal that it constitutes a ground for rejection of a trial under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, it shall not be deemed that an omission of judgment on the grounds for appeal is made. This is a established view of the Supreme Court to regard the case where the appellate court dismisses the appeal against the judgment below as a ground for rejection of a trial (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Da7970, May 29, 2008)

Next, in relation to the assertion that there are grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1)1 (when a judgment court is not constituted under the law) and 3 (when there is any defect in granting a legal representation right, power of attorney, or power necessary for a legal action by a representative) of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a retrial, the record is difficult to view that there exists any grounds for a retrial under the above provisions in the judgment subject

Therefore, the retrial of this case is dismissed, and the costs of the retrial are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

arrow