2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On July 26, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of unpaid wages (Ulsan District Court 2013Da30830, hereinafter “the first instance court”), and the court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on November 26, 2013.

On December 23, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an appeal (Ulsan District Court 2014Na390, hereinafter “the appellate court of this case”) and the court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on May 13, 2015.

(Supreme Court Decision) On June 2, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an appeal on June 2, 2015 (Supreme Court Decision 2015Da34727), and the court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on September 24, 2015 pursuant to Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal of Supreme Court. The said judgment was served on the Plaintiff on October 7, 2015 and became final and conclusive as it is.

B. At the first instance court of the instant case, the Defendant submitted the Plaintiff’s statement of the salary for January and February 2, 2013 as evidence No. 1-1 and 2.

On December 16, 2013, after the judgment of the court of first instance in the instant case was rendered, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Defendant’s representative director D by means of fraud, fabrication of private documents, display of a falsified investigation document, etc. (type 2013 type 490133 at the Ulsan District Prosecutors’ Office), and the Ulsan District Prosecutors’ Office decided on March 31, 2014 that D had no suspicion (Evidence of evidence).

C. On April 2014, when the appellate court of the instant case was in progress, the Plaintiff filed a request with the Ulsan District Prosecutors’ Office for inspection and copying of the written statement (hereinafter “instant written statement”) on February 13, 2014, when the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s employees E were examined as a large person among the records of the instant written complaint case, and the Ulsan District Prosecutors’ Office had the Plaintiff peruse and copy the said written statement, excluding the E’s written statement, pursuant to Article 20-2 of the Rules on the Military Prosecutors’ Office Preservation Affairs (hereinafter “instant written statement”).

In the appellate court of this case, the plaintiff submitted the above statement as reference material. D.

On February 13, 2015, when the appellate court of the instant case was in progress, the Plaintiff.