임대차보증금
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 to claim the return of the lease deposit at this court level 2013da56670, and this court rendered a judgment that accepted the Plaintiff’s claim on December 9, 2014 (the first judgment).
B. The Defendant filed an appeal under this Court No. 2014Na9771, and this Court rendered a judgment revoking the judgment of the first instance on August 26, 2015 and dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim (Re-deliberation).
C. Although the Plaintiff appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2015Da55274, the Supreme Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s final appeal on November 26, 2015 and became final and conclusive by dismissing the Plaintiff’s final appeal.
2. The Plaintiff asserted that the lease contract with B was renewed on March 17, 2008, and on March 20, 2008, paid the lease deposit amounting to KRW 50 million to B, and then re-contracted with the lease term as it is, from March 17, 2010 to March 17, 2013. Since the judgment subject to a retrial omitted the judgment on the validity of the re-contract and the payment of the lease deposit, there is a ground for retrial corresponding to Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.
3. Where any judgment is omitted with respect to an important matter that may affect the judgment, a lawsuit for retrial on the final judgment which has become final and conclusive may be brought (Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act), but where a party claims the grounds by an appeal or fails to assert it with the knowledge thereof, a lawsuit for retrial shall not be brought.
(Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act may be a legitimate ground for retrial against the lower judgment, barring any special circumstance, regardless of whether the appellate court asserted an omission of judgment in the final appeal as a ground for appeal, where an appeal against a judgment subject to retrial was dismissed as in the instant case