On July 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant claiming the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent for the land Nos. 1, 2, and 3 as the appointed party (hereinafter the same shall apply), and the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing the lawsuit on June 12, 2014.

(1) On February 2, 2016, the appellate court rendered an appeal by the Plaintiff. The appellate court reversed the judgment of the first instance on February 2, 2016, dismissed the claim for unjust enrichment on the land No. 1 and 2, and rendered a judgment that partly admitted the claim for unjust enrichment on the land

(Judgment of review) The Plaintiff appealed, but the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on June 10, 2016 (2016Da211187).

Accordingly, the judgment subject to a review was finally affirmed.

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was based on an unlawful survey and appraisal, and there was a new decision on disclosure of information, application for land alteration, and filing of a petition for road cadastral division. Therefore, there exist grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)8 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The judgment subject to a retrial was made without accepting the Plaintiff’s application for on-site verification, and the Plaintiff’s objection to the survey appraisal and rent appraisal, the Defendant’s possession area of which was partially omitted, and thus, there is a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Article 451 (1) 10 of the Civil Procedure Act is contrary to res judicata of a final and conclusive judgment of a prior suit (Seoul District Court 97Da145683) between the designated parties who recognized unjust enrichment by the defendant and the defendant.

3. In light of the proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, whether a lawsuit for retrial is lawful (the part concerning the grounds for retrial under paragraph (1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act), a lawsuit for retrial cannot be filed against the judgment of the court below which became final and conclusive on the grounds alleged as the grounds for appeal, and whether a judgment was omitted on the other hand