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

purport, purport, ..

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants to the effect that the Plaintiff suffered losses due to the Defendants’ unlawful acts, and thus, should compensate for such losses. On December 17, 2014, the court of first instance rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim.

(Cheongju District Court 2014Kadan13242). The plaintiff appealed against the appeal, but before the review, the member was declared dismissed on June 16, 2015.

(Judgment of review, Cheongju District Court 2015Na10227). Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an appeal to the Supreme Court on November 12, 2015, but the Supreme Court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal to the Supreme Court on November 12, 2015, and the judgment subject to review became final and conclusive as it is.

(Supreme Court Decision 2015Da228904). 2. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that: (a) even if the Defendants did not reply to the issues submitted by the Plaintiff, the Defendants lost the Plaintiff; and (b) did not explain the grounds for rejection of the Defendants’ tort constitutes an infringement on the right of equality. This constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Determination

A. Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "when a judgment is omitted on an important matter that may have an impact on a judgment" refers to an attack and defense method submitted by a party in a lawsuit and that does not specify a judgment among the reasons for the judgment, and as long as a judgment was rendered, it is erroneous in the content of the judgment.

or the reasons leading to the judgment was not sufficiently explained.

or the grounds for rejecting the claims of the parties are not individually explained.

Even if this cannot be said to be an omission of judgment as referred to in the above law.

Supreme Court Decision 200