증서진부확인
1. The request for retrial of this case is dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, ..
According to the final records of the judgment subject to review, the following facts are recognized:
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for confirmation of the authenticity of the deed with the Incheon District Court 2015Gahap1792 (hereinafter “the first instance judgment”). On April 10, 2015, the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s lawsuit on the ground that “The lawsuit surrounding the legal relationship to be proved in connection with the instant loan certificate is already underway with the Incheon District Court 2014Gahap13613, and thus, the lawsuit of this case seeking confirmation of the authenticity of the instant loan certificate, separate from the said lawsuit, has no interest in confirmation.”
In response to the judgment of the first instance, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Seoul High Court Decision 2015Na2020740 (hereinafter “Seoul High Court Decision on Review”), but the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on the grounds as stated in the judgment of the first instance on February 3, 2016. The Plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court Decision 2016Da216939 on June 28, 2016, but the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal for non-trial trial on June 28, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive as it became final and conclusive by serving the Plaintiff on July 1, 2016.
The plaintiff asserts that the loan certificate of this case was not prepared by the deceased, and the defendant did not lend money to the deceased, such as the loan certificate of this case, but the judgment subject to a retrial omitted a decision on this part. Thus, the judgment subject to a retrial contains grounds for retrial falling under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act, "when the judgment was omitted on important matters affecting the judgment."
The term "when a judgment has been omitted on important matters affecting the judgment" in Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act refers to the case where a judgment has been omitted on the merits because the requirements for lawsuit are not defective and the case is judged due to the lack of requirements for lawsuit, it would naturally affect the conclusion of the judgment by means of attack and defense which is lawfully submitted by the parties.