Fact-finding based on each other, inconsistent, or insufficient evidence

The fact-finding has been found in violation of the rules of evidence and the incomplete hearing.

Articles 185 and 394 of the Civil Procedure Act

[Defendant-Appellee]

Entry Rate

Kim Jong-chul

Republic of Korea Legal Representative and the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry Doz. Doz.

Busan District Court Decision 52 civil defense 254 delivered on January 14, 1953

We reverse the original judgment.

This case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

The defendant-appellant's ground of appeal reveals that the authenticity of the plaintiff's assertion stated in the column of the original judgment can be recognized, and cited the explanation of the reasons adopted by the court below, "No. 1 (Certificate of Sale) which can be recognized as genuine by the witness's testimony," but no. 33,1,000 won in the statement of the ground of appeal for the establishment of the plaintiff's complaint or the alteration of the lawsuit was completed on the date of purchase, and the witness's testimony that "No. 16,000 won out of the purchase price shall be paid in cash and borrowed the certificate of loan to the person who is the person who is the person who is the person who is the person who is the person who is the person who is the person who is the person who is the person who is the person who is the person, and no. 16,000 won out of the purchase price shall be determined as 3,000 won in cash and 16,000 won shall be determined as 5,000 won in total on the date of sale, 33,0000,00 won.

The plaintiff et al. purchased the land listed in the first instance court's first instance court's judgment cited by the original judgment from the Seocheon-si, Japan, the non-party 1, March 27, 4271. However, the evidence No. 1 does not indicate real estate, and it is difficult to recognize it as part of the land listed in the first instance court's evidence No. 3-2, and the attached list cannot be recognized. Further, the land stated in the evidence No. 3-1, No. 3-2 can not be acknowledged as the evidence of the plaintiff's first instance court's assertion that the plaintiff et al. were the debtor in borrowing money from the non-party 1 corporation of the first instance court's judgment after the purchase of the letter No. 3-1 and No. 5-1, which is the copy of the register of the well-owned land, the plaintiff No. 1 and No. 2 cannot be found as the evidence of the first instance court's conclusion that the plaintiff No. 1's testimony cannot be found as the non-party 1's witness evidence No. 4.

Therefore, in order to review this case in a light, it is decided as per Disposition by the application of Paragraph 1 of Article 407 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Justices Kim Jong-il (Presiding Justice) Kim Dong-dong Kim Jae-ho