토지보상금반환인도및실체당사자에게지급
1. All of the lawsuits for retrial of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
1. Confirmation, etc. of the judgment subject to review
A. The Plaintiff, B, and C filed a lawsuit against the Deceased, A, and E Co., Ltd. against the Cheongju District Court Decision 2014Kadan904, Cheongju District Court Decision 2014Kadan904, and the said court rendered a judgment dismissing all the claims of the said Plaintiffs on October 29, 2014.
B. The Plaintiff appealed against the Deceased by this Court No. 2014Na12479, but the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on May 21, 2015 (hereinafter “the subject judgment on review”).
C. After that, the Plaintiff appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2015Da220788, but on August 27, 2015, the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive after the dismissal of a final appeal was rendered on August 27, 2015.
After the request for review of the instant case, the Deceased died on April 15, 2016. Defendant AB is the wife of the Deceased, and Defendant AC is the wife of the Deceased.
On the other hand, on May 10, 2016, the Defendants filed an application for renunciation of inheritance with the Seoul Family Court 2016 Madan50811, and the said court accepted it on September 7, 2016.
2. Determination as to the existence of a ground for retrial
A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff could sufficiently prove the cause of the claim if the Plaintiff had been present at the date for pleading, but the court of first instance and the presiding judge of the judgment subject to a retrial did not appear at the time of the deceased and conduct an examination of his nature with the Plaintiff.
In addition, the deceased did not appear only once at the first instance court and the date for pleading of the decision subject to a retrial, and even his legal representative was present at the date for pleading, but did not make oral pleadings. This decision should be deemed to be a judgment of confession under Article 150 of the Civil Procedure Act, or the plaintiff's claim should be accepted by being recognized to be true under Article 369 of the same Act.
Nevertheless, the presiding judge of the first instance court and the judgment subject to a retrial shall manipulate the judgment without disregarding it.