Whether the grounds for appeal on the basis of the violation of precedents regarding the interpretation of disposal documents are justified (negative)

The grounds of appeal that there exists a violation of the precedent regarding the validity of the disposition document in the judgment of the court below are nothing more than a simple violation of the law even though such error was found in the judgment of the court below, and the Supreme Court precedents purporting that such error constitutes a violation of the law, and therefore, it does not constitute any of the grounds provided for in each subparagraph of Article 11(1) of the Act on

Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Promotion of Legal Proceedings

Supreme Court Decision 82Da595 Decided January 18, 1983

Plaintiff

Defendant 1, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 82Na4232 delivered on June 15, 1983

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The gist of the grounds of appeal is that the court below erred in finding facts in violation of the Supreme Court precedents as to the validity of a disposition document and in violation of the rules of reasoning, rule of experience and logic, but even if there were errors identical to the theory of lawsuit in the judgment below, it is nothing more than a simple violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, and since the party members' precedents pointing out by the theory of lawsuit declared that the above errors constituted violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, the grounds for pointing out the grounds for appeal are nothing more than the grounds for pointing out all, and therefore, it cannot be deemed a legitimate

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

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)