미지급용역컨설팅비용 및 손해배상금
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, ..
1. On May 10, 2018, in Seoul Central District Court case No. 2017Gaso360347, the above court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 8,052,00 won and interest thereon at the rate of 5% per annum from February 6, 2018 to May 10, 2018, and at the rate of 15% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.” The Defendant appealed against the judgment and appealed to the above court No. 2018Na31247, Dec. 13, 2018, the above court rendered a new judgment that “The Plaintiff’s claim corresponding to the cancellation part of the judgment against the Defendant among the judgment of first instance is dismissed,” and the Plaintiff’s appeal that became final and conclusive by the Supreme Court either the Plaintiff’s objection against the judgment subject to a new trial or the Plaintiff’s appeal that became final and conclusive by the Supreme Court under the Supreme Court Decision No. 20195Da254297, Feb. 205, 2015, 20197.
2. Determination on the grounds for retrial
A. In the judgment subject to a retrial by the Plaintiff, there are grounds for retrial falling under Article 451(1)4 and 7 of the Civil Procedure Act (when a judge, who was involved in a judgment, commits a crime relating to duties in connection with the case), and Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act (when false statement by a witness
B. Determination 1) As to the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)4 and 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, a lawsuit for retrial may be brought only when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence has become final and conclusive or a final and conclusive judgment of a fine for negligence cannot be rendered for reasons other than lack of evidence in cases falling under Article 451(1)4 and 7 of the same Act.
When the requirements of the review are not met, the action for retrial itself is illegal and thus the grounds for retrial are inappropriate.