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

purport, purport, ..

The Plaintiff brought a lawsuit against the Defendant on the ground that he/she met the requirements for persons who rendered distinguished service to the State as Incheon District Court Decision 2014Gudan1434, on the ground that he/she was serving as a labor unit B at the time of the Korean War (hereinafter “instant wounds”). However, the court of first instance rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on September 15, 2015 on the ground that there was insufficient evidence.

B. The Plaintiff appealed and appealed as Seoul High Court No. 2015Nu60787. However, the appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on June 22, 2016, on the same ground as the first instance judgment (hereinafter “the judgment on review”).

C. The Plaintiff re-appellanted and appealed to the Supreme Court Decision 2016Du44865, but on October 13, 2016, the final appeal was dismissed on the ground that there was no ground of appeal, and the judgment subject to final judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of a retrial suit

A. The plaintiff's assertion that "the judgment on review, despite the sufficient evidence, rejected the plaintiff's claim. The defendant, ex officio, investigated and confirmed facts and transferred the burden of proof to the plaintiff without investigation despite the duty to take measures corresponding to the result. Thus, the decision on review has grounds for retrial."

B. A lawsuit for a retrial on a final judgment that became final and conclusive is permitted only when there are grounds for retrial stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, and the grounds for appeal by the Plaintiff do not constitute any grounds for retrial under Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Thus, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it is unlawful.