기타(금전)
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
1. On July 1, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking rent against the Defendant (Seoul District Court Seosan Branched to Daejeon District Court 2015dan5738). On October 19, 2016, the said court rendered a judgment that partially accepted the Plaintiff’s claim (hereinafter “the judgment for review”) and the said judgment for review became final and conclusive on November 8, 2016 on the grounds that the Plaintiff and the Defendant did not file an appeal.
2. Determination on the legitimacy of the litigation for retrial of this case
A. The plaintiff asserts to the following purport.
On the second day for pleading of the case subject to review, the Plaintiff and the Defendant set the average of the appraisal results by the Plaintiff’s request and the Defendant’s request. The judgment subject to review was erroneous by calculating the rent according to the appraisal results by the Defendant’s request, in violation of the aforementioned agreement.
Therefore, there are grounds for retrial in the judgment subject to review.
B. A lawsuit for retrial on a final judgment that became final and conclusive shall be permitted only where there exist the grounds stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, where the ground alleged by the Plaintiff for retrial does not constitute such ground, the
(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da31307 delivered on October 25, 1996, etc.). Thus, even if the plaintiff's assertion is based on the plaintiff's argument, there is no ground for retrial as stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.
3. If so, the litigation of this case is unlawful, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.