손해배상(기)
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 are significant in this court, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review:
On August 5, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for damages claim against the Ulsan District Court 2008Gaso81650, and was sentenced to a judgment against the said court on July 14, 2009.
B. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed as the Ulsan District Court 2009Na3975 on November 19, 2009, and the appellate court rendered a judgment against the Plaintiff on the ground that “The Defendant fabricated evidence in the case of the loan claim No. 91Gau9568 in Busan District Court Ulsan District Court Ulsan District Court Ulsan Branch 91Gau9568, which caused the Plaintiff to be ruled against the Plaintiff, and there is no evidence to prove that the Defendant made the Plaintiff detained the Plaintiff who did not commit the crime in the case of attempted fraud, etc. in the above support No. 92Kadan18666.”
On November 26, 2009, the plaintiff was served with an authentic copy of the above judgment, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on December 11, 2009.
C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for retrial against the judgment of the trial court prior to the retrial as the Ulsan District Court 2010Na208, but on June 30, 201, the judgment dismissing the lawsuit for retrial was rendered and the said judgment became final and conclusive as it is.
2. "When a judgment is omitted on important matters affecting the judgment" under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act as to the legitimacy of a lawsuit for retrial of this case refers to where a party submitted in a lawsuit and failed to clarify the judgment in the reasoning of the judgment concerning the means of attack and defense which affect the judgment. As long as the judgment exists, even if the reasons leading to the judgment are not clearly explained or the grounds for rejecting the party's claims are not individually explained, the omission of judgment under the above Article of the Civil Procedure Act shall not
(Supreme Court Decision 2007Da69834, 69841 Decided November 27, 2008). However, in a judgment prior to the retrial, the fact that the Defendant’s liability for damages against the Plaintiff exists is determined.