하자보수금 등
1. The quasi-examination of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of the application for quasi-deliberation are assessed against the appointed party.
After the lapse of a case, the following facts are apparent in the records or obvious to this court.
The quasi-deliberation applicant (appointed party, hereinafter “applicant”) filed an application for quasi-deliberation with Seoul High Court No. 2014Rena956 (hereinafter “Respondent”), but the above court rendered a judgment that “the part of the judgment and decision of the Seoul High Court No. 2012Na48963 among the applications for quasi-deliberation shall be dismissed, and the part concerning the rejection order of the Seoul High Court No. 2014Rena536 case shall be dismissed.” The above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.
On June 18, 2017, the applicant filed an application for quasi-deliberation of this case with respect to the judgment, decision, and order stated in the attached Form, including the Seoul High Court Decision 2014Ja956.
On July 11, 2017, this Court rendered a decision to order the applicant to deposit KRW 2,50,000 for the respondent within seven days from the date this decision became final and conclusive in accordance with Articles 117(2) and 120 of the Civil Procedure Act on the ground that the application for quasi-deliberation of this case constitutes a case where it is evident that the application for non-deliberation of this case is groundless. The above decision was served on the applicant on August 14, 2017.
On August 15, 2017, the applicant filed an application for the cancellation of security against the instant decision.
On August 16, 2017, the court ordered the correction of the order to correct the stamp by selecting the application for cancellation of the said security as an immediate appeal against the instant decision. However, the applicant submitted only the document stating “an amendment” but did not comply with the time limit for the correction.
On September 21, 2017, this Court dismissed a petition for immediate appeal filed by an applicant on the ground that the applicant was not aware of, and the rejection order was served on the applicant on October 21, 2017, but the petition for immediate appeal was not filed against the applicant.