부당이득금
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, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are clear in records or distinguished to this court:
On December 31, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants seeking return of unjust enrichment. On June 11, 2015, the Gwangju District Court rendered a judgment of the first instance court that all dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants.
(Seoul District Court 2014Kadan63785). (b)
On June 29, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against the judgment of the first instance on June 29, 2015 (the Plaintiff withdrawn the part of the claim for removal of a building, the claim for land transfer, the transfer of equity ownership, and the claim for cancellation of the registration of establishment of a mortgage). The Gwangju District Court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial that dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on October 21, 2
(Seoul District Court 2015Na6407). (c)
On November 9, 2015, the Plaintiff appealed to the judgment subject to a retrial, and appealed. However, on March 10, 2016, the Supreme Court rendered a ruling dismissing the lower judgment, and on March 11, 2016, the judgment became final and conclusive on the same day by serving the Plaintiff on March 11, 2016.
2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that each real estate listed in the separate sheet against the Defendants was owned by the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff sought a return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent from November 21, 1997, on the premise that each real estate listed in the separate sheet is owned by the Plaintiff. The judgment subject to a retrial is dismissed on the grounds that the Plaintiff’s claim goes against the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment. As such, there exists a ground for retrial that “when the judgment was omitted on important matters that may affect the judgment” under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act
B. According to Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act, when a judgment on a material fact that may affect the judgment is omitted, a lawsuit for retrial may be brought against the final judgment that has become final and conclusive.
However, according to the proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, the parties appeal.