The general recognition of documentary evidence and the case of violation of the rules of evidence

It is a violation of the rules of evidence and incomplete hearing to recognize the fact that the contract for sale and purchase of part of the real estate is comprehensively accepted without selecting and selecting documentary evidence with an upper level of the same real estate.

Articles 185 and 394 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff (Attorney Kim Tae-tae, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

[Defendant-Appellee] U.S. Legal Representative of the Republic of Korea (Attorney Lee Byung-hee et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee)

Jeju District Court of the first instance, Daegu High Court of the second instance, 52 civilian 389 delivered on December 4, 1953

We reverse the original judgment.

This case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

The judgment of the court below is not only inconsistent with the rules of evidence but also erroneous in finding facts. (1) Even though the defendant recognized only the registration No. 2 as the site No. 1989 on August 31, 200, the court below accepted the plaintiff's claim by recognizing the authenticity of evidence No. 1. 2 as the witness Kim Young-chul's testimony to purchase and sell the real estate at the time of sale and purchase of the real estate, the plaintiff's testimony as the witness's assertion and the fact that the plaintiff completed the whole number of the proceeds of the sale and delivery of the real estate, and the fact that the plaintiff could not obtain any name at the time of sale and purchase of the real estate before the date of sale and purchase of the receipts No. 1989 on which the plaintiff had no signature at the time of sale and purchase of the real estate before the date of sale and purchase of the real estate after the date of sale and purchase of the receipts No. 1989 on which the plaintiff had no signature at the time of sale and purchase of the real estate after the date of sale and sale.

The plaintiff's answer is that (1) in case of the sale and purchase of real estate in Korea, the receipts will be prepared at the time of the sale and purchase of the real estate in Korea, and if the plaintiff purchased the real estate at the time of his argument, at least 8.15 years, the receipt of the price will be entered at least that of the witness residing in the house, but the receipt of the price will be entered in the sale certificate (No. 1) and the sale certificate (No. 2) prepared by the judicial clerk was received and sold at the same time, and it is not necessary to prepare a receipt. (2) Even if the plaintiff was able to communicate with the witness who had resided in the real estate before the release, the plaintiff's sale and purchase of the real estate at the time of the sale and purchase of the real estate in Korea, the plaintiff's new title of the real estate was no longer known to the plaintiff at the time of the sale and purchase of the real estate in Korea (the plaintiff's new title of the real estate in Korea).

According to the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the original judgment, the above judgment recognized that the above judgment was concluded by comprehensively taking into account the whole purport of Gap evidence No. 1 and No. 2 evidence No. 2's testimony and pleading, and that the sale contract of the real estate of this case, such as the plaintiff head, was established, and that the transfer of this real estate was completed by allowing the delivery of this case. However, according to the testimony of the Kim Young-chul, it can be pride that the plaintiff could have taken over this real estate after 8.15 years. According to Gap evidence No. 2-1, it can be recognized that the transfer registration of ownership was completed on August 31, 4278 with respect to the real estate among the sale and purchase real estate, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this as to the building. Nevertheless, the above judgment of the court of first instance cannot be accepted as the whole contents of evidence No. 1 and No. 2-1, which are the real estate of this case claimed by the plaintiff.

Justices Kim Jong-chul (Presiding Justice) (Presiding Justice)