【Holding】
[1] Purport of Article 402-2(1) of the Civil Procedure Act introducing the system of mandatory submission of a statement of grounds for appeal while granting the appellant, under paragraph (2), the right to apply for an extension of the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, and whether accepting an application for extension of the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal falls within the discretion of the appellate court (affirmative, in principle) / Whether the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal under Article 402-2(1) of the Civil Procedure Act is a peremptory period (negative), and whether Article 173 of the Civil Procedure Act on subsequent completion of procedural acts applies to the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal (negative) / Where there exists a cause not attributable to the appellant, or a cause corresponding thereto, for failing to observe the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, whether a court may extend the submission period pursuant to Article 172(1) of the Civil Procedure Act even after the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal has elapsed (affirmative)
[2] In a case where A, after receiving from the appellate court a notice of receipt of the appeal records, applied for litigation aid about 20 days before the expiration of the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, but a panel other than the lower court panel in charge of the main case rendered a decision granting litigation aid regarding attorney's fees close to the expiration date of the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, and the decision granting litigation aid was served on A after the expiration date of the period, while the lower court panel dismissed A's appeal on the day following the expiration date of the period on the ground that the statement of grounds for appeal had not been submitted, the Court held that where an appellant did not submit the statement of grounds for appeal by the expiration date of the submission period in order to await the decision on the application for litigation aid, there is a strong possibility that a cause not attributable to the appellant, or a cause corresponding thereto, exists for failing to observe the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal; nevertheless, the lower court's order dismissing A's appeal without examining whether such cause existed erred in its misapprehension of legal principles
【Summary of Order】
[1] An appellant who has not stated the grounds for appeal in the petition of appeal must submit a statement of grounds for appeal to the appellate court within 40 days from the date of receiving the notice of receipt of the appeal records under Article 400(3) of the Civil Procedure Act (Article 402-2(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). The appellate court may, by a decision upon the appellant's application, extend the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal by one month, only once (paragraph (2) of the same Article), but where the appellant fails to submit the statement of grounds for appeal within the submission period (or the extended period, if the submission period has been extended), the appellate court shall dismiss the appeal by a decision (main sentence of Article 402-3(1) of the same Act). This system of mandatory submission of a statement of grounds for appeal was introduced by the Civil Procedure Act as amended by Act No. 20003 on January 16, 2024, in order to organize the issues of appellate cases at an early stage and thereby enable prompt deliberation at the appellate instance.
Furthermore, in the reality of our civil litigation, which does not adopt mandatory representation by attorneys, where a party conducts the litigation in person without the assistance of an attorney, there is a possibility that, owing to a lack of professional legal knowledge, the party may fail to submit the statement of grounds for appeal within the submission period, resulting in the appeal being dismissed and the party being unable to proceed with the litigation any further; therefore, in order to pursue both the prompt progress of the appellate proceedings and the protection of the appellant's interests, the party has been granted the right to apply for an extension so that the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal may be extended once. Where an appellant applies for an extension of the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal pursuant to Article 402-2(2) of the Civil Procedure Act, whether to accept the application falls, in principle, within the discretion of the appellate court. In such case, the appellate court may decide whether to extend the period by examining various circumstances, such as whether the extension of the submission period would unduly delay the proceedings and whether it is necessary to extend the submission period to guarantee the appellant's procedural rights, and the same applies even if the submission period has elapsed before a decision on the application is made, as long as the application for extension was filed within the submission period.
Meanwhile, since the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal under Article 402-2(1) of the Civil Procedure Act cannot be regarded as a peremptory period, Article 173 of the Civil Procedure Act, which permits subsequent completion of procedural acts where a party was unable to observe a peremptory period due to a cause not attributable to the party, does not apply to the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal. However, considering, inter alia, that the disadvantage suffered by the appellant due to the introduction of the system of mandatory submission of a statement of grounds for appeal cannot be permitted to reach the degree of infringing the right to trial under Article 27(1) of the Constitution, it should be held that, where there exists a cause not attributable to the appellant, or a cause corresponding thereto, for failing to observe the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, the court may, in order to substantively guarantee the appellant's right to trial, extend the submission period pursuant to Article 172(1) of the Civil Procedure Act even after the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal has elapsed.
[2] In a case where A, after receiving from the appellate court a notice of receipt of the appeal records, applied for litigation aid about 20 days before the expiration of the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, but a panel other than the lower court panel in charge of the main case rendered a decision granting litigation aid regarding attorney's fees close to the expiration date of the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, and the decision granting litigation aid was served on A after the expiration date of the period, while the lower court panel dismissed A's appeal on the day following the expiration date of the period on the ground that the statement of grounds for appeal had not been submitted, the Court held as follows: if an appellant who bears the obligation to submit a statement of grounds for appeal applied, within the submission period, for litigation aid regarding attorney's fees on the ground of economic circumstances, etc., but the submission period elapsed without the appellant receiving the assistance of an attorney necessary for preparing and submitting the statement of grounds for appeal because the court delayed the decision on the application and the service procedure, then, barring special circumstances, this is no different from an infringement of the appellant's right to receive the assistance of an attorney through litigation aid, and thus the appeal should not be immediately dismissed by a decision on the ground that the statement of grounds for appeal was not submitted within the submission period; accordingly, where an appellant did not submit the statement of grounds for appeal by the expiration date of the submission period in order to await the decision on the application for litigation aid, there is a strong possibility that a cause not attributable to the appellant, or a cause corresponding thereto, exists for failing to observe the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, barring special circumstances such as an attempt to evade the system of mandatory submission of a statement of grounds for appeal by invoking the litigation aid system; therefore, the appellate court should have examined whether such cause existed and considered whether the case fell under a case where the submission period could be extended pursuant to Article 172(1) of the Civil Procedure Act even though the period for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal had elapsed; nevertheless, the lower court's order dismissing A's appeal without examining this erred in its misapprehension of legal principles.
【Referenced Statutes】
[1] Article 27(1) of the Constitution; Articles 172(1), 173, 402-2, and 402-3(1) of the Civil Procedure Act [2] Article 27(1) of the Constitution; Articles 128, 172(1), 402-2, and 402-3(1) of the Civil Procedure Act
【Referenced Precedents】
[1] Supreme Court Order 81Sa2, January 28, 1981 (Gong1981, 13677)
(Source: Supreme Court Order 2025Ma7481, August 25, 2026 | Judicial Information Disclosure Portal, Supreme Court of Korea)
2026. 10. 26. · By Attorney Dongwoo Shin
Call
KakaoTalk
E-mail