준재심의 소
1. The quasi-examination of the applicant (quasi-examination applicant) shall be dismissed;
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the applicant for quasi-examination.
The summary of the case is the case that the applicant (only the quasi-Appellant, hereinafter referred to as the "applicant") seeks the revocation of the decision of recommending reconciliation between the other party (the quasi-Appellant, hereinafter referred to as the "other party").
In fact, on September 23, 2013, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a decision to recommend reconciliation between the applicant and the other party that "the applicant withdraws the application for the final claim inspection judgment, and the cost of the application is borne by each person." On September 27, 2013, the decision subject to quasi-examination was sent to the applicant and the other party respectively.
The applicant filed a written objection on October 16, 2013, which was two weeks from the date on which the decision subject to quasi-deliberation was served. On June 10, 2014, the applicant filed an application for designation of date on the ground that the failure to comply with the objection period was an error in the entry of the period for objection to the decision for recommending reconciliation as set forth in paragraph (3) below and the error in the objection period by the working division
On November 19, 2014, the rehabilitation court rendered a decision that "the termination of the final inspection judgment of rehabilitation claims shall be declared, and the objection filed by the applicant shall be dismissed," and the above decision became final and conclusive.
【In the absence of any dispute, there is a ground for a retrial under Article 451(1)5 of the Civil Procedure Act to inform the appellate court in charge of the filing of the grounds for a retrial of the existence of the grounds for a retrial of the entire purport of the arguments as to the grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1)5 of the Civil Procedure Act to one month, not two weeks, because it constitutes a waiver of duty and constitutes a waiver of duty and thereby constitutes “when a confession was made due to another person’s act subject to criminal punishment, or it was obstructed in submitting the means of offence or defense that may affect the judgment.”
Judgment
The period for objection shall be one month to the applicant by the working-level of the full bench.