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, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are apparent or apparent in records in this court:
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant in this Court No. 2017Da526172, and the dismissal judgment was rendered on July 19, 2018, and the appellate court rendered a judgment of dismissal on January 25, 2019, also in this Court No. 2018Na49477, which was the appellate court. The appellate court rendered a judgment of dismissal of appeal on May 30, 2019, which was the appellate court’s final appeal No. 2019Da217483, which was the final appeal.
B. On July 1, 2019, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for reexamination of the instant case.
2. Whether the litigation for retrial of this case is legitimate
A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was added to the statement of the first instance court on June 28, 2018, stating that “the Defendant shall not speak any more” due to the correction of the protocol, and thus, the dismissal judgment has become final and conclusive as the judgment of dismissal was rendered, and there are other grounds for retrial. As such, there are various grounds for retrial, the judgment of retrial, such as the purport of the claim, is sought as stated above.
(b) the judgment stated that “no speech would be any more.”
Inasmuch as it is apparent that it is not a claimant’s abortion, the Plaintiff’s assertion itself does not constitute grounds for retrial under Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. Moreover, there is no other ground for retrial under the record, and thus, the instant lawsuit for retrial is unlawful.
(Supreme Court Decision 96Da31307 delivered on October 25, 1996, and on the other hand, the Plaintiff submitted the title of “Quasi-Review Director” to the Plaintiff, but decided to file a lawsuit for retrial in light of the Plaintiff’s assertion. Even if a lawsuit for quasi-Review was filed, it is apparent in the record that there was no arbitra of the claimant, etc. subject to quasi-Review, and thus, is still unlawful). 3. Accordingly, the instant lawsuit for reexamination is dismissed.