토지인도등
1. The plaintiff (the re-examination plaintiff and the re-examination plaintiff) shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of the review are assessed against the Plaintiff.
The following facts are apparent in the record or significant in this court. A.
On February 8, 2017, the first instance court (Tgu District Court 2016dan38013) declared the judgment of the first instance court that accepted the plaintiff's claim on February 8, 2017 against the claim for the delivery of land against the defendant.
B. On November 9, 2017, the appellate court (Tgu District Court 2017Na2654) appealed against the Defendant, and the appellate court (Tgu District Court 2017Na2654) rendered a judgment subject to a retrial to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim (including the primary claim added and expanded by the appellate court) by citing the appeal.
C. On November 14, 2017, the Plaintiff served an original copy of the judgment subject to a retrial and appealed to the Supreme Court (2017Da276501), but the judgment dismissing the judgment was rendered on March 15, 2018, and the original copy of the judgment was served on the Plaintiff on March 19, 2018, and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.
In the Daegu District Court Decision 2018Na97, the Plaintiff recognized that the Plaintiff’s father E was aware that he sold the instant land by specifying the location of his father, but the Plaintiff determined that it is difficult to recognize the Plaintiff as the sectional ownership of the instant dispute portion was a ground for retrial corresponding to the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act, and filed a lawsuit for retrial.
Based on the legal principle of Supreme Court Decision 2014Da50944 Decided November 13, 2014, the foregoing court rendered a final appeal that dismissed a final appeal on the judgment subject to a retrial as a result of a retrial, and thus, the omission of judgment in the judgment subject to a retrial cannot be deemed grounds for retrial under Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. On December 5, 2018, on the ground that it cannot be deemed that there exist grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the said court rendered a judgment dismissing a lawsuit on the judgment subject to a retrial (hereinafter referred to as
The plaintiff's assertion.