근저당권말소
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, ..
1. The following facts can be acknowledged through a final record of the judgment subject to a retrial:
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking cancellation of the right to collateral security against the Seoul Central District Court 2014Gahap19351, and the above court rendered a judgment that accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on October 28, 2014 (the first instance judgment).
B. The Defendant filed an appeal with Seoul High Court No. 2014Na204296, and the said court revoked the first instance judgment on June 12, 2015 and rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim (Re-deliberation).
C. Although the Plaintiff appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2015Da225356, the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive by a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s final appeal on November 12, 2015.
2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act exist, since the judgment subject to a retrial omitted a judgment on the appropriation of performance or set-off with respect to the dividend of the auction procedure regarding G land
3. Determination
(a) A lawsuit for retrial shall be brought within 30 days from the date the relevant party becomes aware of the grounds for retrial after the judgment becomes final;
(Article 456(1) of the Civil Procedure Act and Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that the existence of the grounds for retrial, such as omitting a judgment, may be known by read the original copy of the judgment subject to retrial, unless there is a special reason. Therefore, it is reasonable to deem that the party was aware of the existence of the grounds for retrial at the time when the original copy of the judgment subject to retrial was served. If a subsequent judgment became final and conclusive, the period for filing a lawsuit for retrial on the grounds of
(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da33930 Decided September 28, 1993, etc.). According to the records, the original copy of the instant judgment subject to a retrial was served on the Plaintiff’s legal representative on June 18, 2015, and thereafter, the Supreme Court confirmed on November 12, 2015 that the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive as the dismissal of an appeal subject to a retrial, and the lawsuit of this case is instituted.