Open Decision Ledger · Civil procedure & enforcement
Adequacy of grounds of appeal stated in the notice of appeal
Supreme Court, Feb. 26, 2026, 2025Ma9010 (ruling)
Case name: 약정금[항소이유서 미제출에 따른 항소각하 결정을 다투는 사건]
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where an appellant stated in the notice of appeal only that the first-instance judgment had misapprehended the facts and that specific grounds would be filed later, and then filed no statement of grounds of appeal within the period, was that statement a lawful statement of grounds of appeal under the proviso to Article 402-3(1) of the Civil Procedure Act?
Holding
It was not. Under Article 126-2(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules the appellant had to write down which of the grounds listed in its items was relied on, and under Article 126-2(2), save where the first-instance judgment gave no reasons under Article 11-2(3) of the Summary Trial Case Act, had to specify the parts of that judgment in dispute. Since the respondent must be able to rebut under Article 126-3 and the argument must centre on the appellant's claims under Article 127-3, the statement here was not a lawful statement of grounds within the proviso to Article 402-3(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
위와 같은 기재만으로는 제1심판결 중 갑이 다투는 부분을 구체적으로 특정할 수 없고, 상대방이 갑의 주장에 대하여 반박하고 갑의 주장을 중심으로 변론이 집중될 수 있을 정도로 항소이유를 기재하였다고 볼 수도 없으므로
Unofficial English translation
Statements in the form above alone cannot specifically identify the portion of the judgment of the court of first instance that A disputes, nor can it be regarded that grounds for appeal were stated to such an extent that the opposing party may rebut A's assertions and oral argument may be focused on A's assertions; therefore,
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
재항고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The re-appeal is dismissed.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
항소이유는 적어도 피항소인이 항소인의 주장에 대하여 반박하고 항소인의 주장을 중심으로 변론이 집중될 수 있을 정도로 기재하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
Grounds for appeal must be stated at least to such an extent that the appellee may rebut the appellant's assertions and oral argument may be focused on the appellant's assertions.
Factors
- 항소인은 민사소송규칙 제126조의2 제1항 각 호 가운데 어느 사유를 항소이유로 삼는지 항소이유서에 적어 제출하여야 하고
- 소액사건심판법 제11조의2 제3항 본문에 따라 제1심판결에 이유를 적지 않은 때를 제외하고는 항소이유를 적을 때 제1심판결 중 다투는 부분을 구체적으로 특정하여야 한다
- 피항소인이 항소인의 주장에 대하여 반박하고 항소인의 주장을 중심으로 변론이 집중될 수 있을 정도로 기재하여야 한다
Unofficial English translation
• The appellant must state in the statement of grounds for appeal which of the grounds under each subparagraph of Article 126-2, paragraph (1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure is relied upon as grounds for appeal, and submit it, and
• under the main text of Article 11-2 (3) of the Trial of Small Claims Act, except where no reasons were stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, when stating grounds for appeal, the specific portion of the judgment of the court of first instance that is disputed must be identified
• It must be stated to such an extent that the appellee may rebut the appellant's assertions and oral argument may be focused on the appellant's assertions
Relation to precedent
States a new standard Read from the decision
항소이유는 적어도 피항소인이 항소인의 주장에 대하여 반박하고 항소인의 주장을 중심으로 변론이 집중될 수 있을 정도로 기재하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
Grounds for appeal must be stated at least to such an extent that the appellee may rebut the appellant's assertions and oral argument may be focused on the appellant's assertions.
Decisions referred to
해당 본문 참조
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
How specific must grounds of appeal be where the first-instance judgment gave only short reasons, so that the duty to specify the disputed parts arises but cannot be carried out in full?
An amendment to Article 402-3 of the Civil Procedure Act or to Articles 126-2, 126-3 and 127-3 of the Civil Procedure Rules would call for this entry to be read again. So would a later decision requiring the court to examine grounds ex officio where a notice of appeal contains only a general statement.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 6 (relation to precedent).
Axis 6 (Relation to precedent): Primary “States a new standard” vs Independent “Cannot be determined”
The primary reading treats the decision as setting a new standard for the specificity of grounds of appeal, while the independent reading cannot confirm whether a precedent exists since the input gives no prior case information.
항소이유는 적어도 피항소인이 항소인의 주장에 대하여 반박하고 항소인의 주장을 중심으로 변론이 집중될 수 있을 정도로 기재하여야 한다.Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Incheon District Court, in its ruling of 14 October 2025 (2025Na53716), dismissed the appeal under Article 402-3(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. It found that the appellant had filed no statement of grounds of appeal within the period, that there was no reason for the court to examine the matter ex officio, and that the notice of appeal stated no grounds of appeal.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error. Deciding both ex officio and on the grounds of the re-appeal, it held that the court below had neither breached the proviso to Article 402-3(1) by failing to consider grounds for ex officio examination nor Article 400(3) by failing to give notice of receipt of the appeal record, so as to affect the judgment. It stated for itself that grounds of appeal must at least let the respondent rebut and let the argument centre on the appellant's claims, and dismissed the re-appeal on the unanimous opinion of the participating Justices.
Distinguishing conditions
- A first-instance judgment that gave no reasons, where Article 11-2(3) of the Summary Trial Case Act removes the duty to specify the parts in dispute.
- A notice of appeal, or a statement filed within the period, that names which statutory ground is relied on and specifies the parts of the first-instance judgment in dispute.
- A case in which what was filed, read as a whole, lets the respondent rebut the appellant's claims and lets the argument centre on them, even where no separate statement of grounds of appeal was filed.
Record verification notes
Read the first-instance judgment first to see whether it gave reasons, since that decides whether the duty to specify arose at all. Gather everything filed within the period, here the notice of appeal and the application to correct the relief sought, before concluding that nothing amounting to grounds was filed. Then check whether notice of receipt of the appeal record was given, since that was one of the points argued.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 적법한 항소이유 기재의 정도 [2] 갑이 제1심판결에 대하여 항소하며 항소장의 항소이유란에 "원심의 판단은 사실을 오인하여 판결에 영향을 미친 위법이 있어 이 사건 항소에 이르렀습니다. (구체적인 항소이유는 추후 제출할 것입니다.)"라고만 기재하였고, 이후 항소기록접수통지서를 송달받았음에도 제출기간 내에 항소이유서를 제출하지 아니한 사안에서, 위와 같은 기재는 민사소송법 제402조의3 제1항 단서에서 정한 ‘항소장에 항소이유가 기재되어 있는 때’에 해당하는 적법한 항소이유 기재로 볼 수 없다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
[1] The degree to which grounds for appeal must be stated for validity [2] A case in which, where A appealed the judgment of the court of first instance and stated only the following in the grounds-for-appeal column of the appeal brief: "The judgment of the court below contains an error of fact that affected the judgment, and this appeal has been filed accordingly. (The specific grounds for appeal will be submitted later.)", and thereafter, although served with the notice of receipt of the appeal record, did not submit a statement of grounds for appeal within the submission period, it was held that such a statement cannot be regarded as a valid statement of grounds for appeal corresponding to the case where 'grounds for appeal are stated in the appeal brief' as provided in the proviso to Article 402-3 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act
Summary of the holding
[1] 항소인은 민사소송규칙 제126조의2 제1항 각 호 가운데 어느 사유를 항소이유로 삼는지 항소이유서에 적어 제출하여야 하고(민사소송규칙 제126조의2 제1항), 소액사건심판법 제11조의2 제3항 본문에 따라 제1심판결에 이유를 적지 않은 때를 제외하고는 항소이유를 적을 때 제1심판결 중 다투는 부분을 구체적으로 특정하여야 한다(민사소송규칙 제126조의2 제2항). 재판장 등은 피항소인에게 상당한 기간을 정하여 항소이유서에 기재된 항소인의 주장에 대한 반박내용을 적은 답변서를 제출하게 할 수 있고(민사소송규칙 제126조의3), 항소법원은 항소이유서에 기재된 쟁점을 중심으로 변론이 집중되도록 함으로써 변론이 가능하면 속행되지 않도록 하여야 하고 당사자는 이에 협력하여야 하므로(민사소송규칙 제127조의3), 항소이유는 적어도 피항소인이 항소인의 주장에 대하여 반박하고 항소인의 주장을 중심으로 변론이 집중될 수 있을 정도로 기재하여야 한다. [2] 갑이 제1심판결에 대하여 항소하며 항소장의 항소이유란에 "원심의 판단은 사실을 오인하여 판결에 영향을 미친 위법이 있어 이 사건 항소에 이르렀습니다. (구체적인 항소이유는 추후 제출할 것입니다.)"라고만 기재하였고, 이후 항소기록접수통지서를 송달받았음에도 제출기간 내에 항소이유서를 제출하지 아니한 사안에서, 위와 같은 기재만으로는 제1심판결 중 갑이 다투는 부분을 구체적으로 특정할 수 없고, 상대방이 갑의 주장에 대하여 반박하고 갑의 주장을 중심으로 변론이 집중될 수 있을 정도로 항소이유를 기재하였다고 볼 수도 없으므로, 위와 같은 기재는 민사소송법 제402조의3 제1항 단서에서 정한 ‘항소장에 항소이유가 기재되어 있는 때’에 해당하는 적법한 항소이유 기재로 볼 수 없다고 한 사례.
Order
재항고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The re-appeal is dismissed.
Provisions referred to
[1] 민사소송법 제402조의2 제1항, 민사소송규칙 제126조의2 제1항, 제2항, 제126조의3, 제127조의3 / [2] 민사소송법 제397조 제2항, 제402조의2 제1항, 제402조의3 제1항, 민사소송규칙 제126조의2 제1항, 제2항, 제126조의3, 제127조의3
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger