항소이유서 제출 강제 제도 도입과 민사 절차법상의 불복이유서 제도의 정비 방안 — 민사소송법과 민사집행법의 정합성 제고 방안을 중심으로 —

초록

The Civil Procedure Act (hereinafter “the Act”), as amended on January 16, 2024 (enforced on March 1, 2025), and the Supreme Court Rules of Civil Procedure (hereinafter “the Rules”), as amended on January 23, 2025 (enforced on March 1, 2025), have rendered the submission of a statement of grounds for appeal mandatory in civil proceedings. Ostensible, the explicit rationale behind the newly enacted Article 402-2 of the Act is to alleviate systemic delays in trial proceedings. Strictly textually, if an appellant who has been served a notice of receipt of the appeal record fails to submit the statement of grounds for appeal within 40 days, the appeal is subject to dismissal. Thus, the statutory design appears to expedite appellate proceedings by incentivizing early submissions. However, an examination of Articles 127-3 and 127-4 of the Rules—promulgated one year after the statutory amendment—reveals that the systemic shift extends far beyond mere procedural acceleration or the concentration of pleas and evidence. Rather, these rules betray a tacit intent to curtail the continuative nature (Prozessfortsetzungsprinzip) of appellate review, infusing it instead with a retrospective character(Nachprüfungsprinzip). Furthermore, the introduction of this mandatory statement invites a broader academic reflection: it prompts scrutiny not only of the operational defects inherent in the new system itself, but also of the structural inconsistencies among the various 'statements of grounds for objection' scattered throughout the current Act.

키워드