The litigation costs for retrial shall be borne by the defendant.

The reason for the request for retrial is that there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial.

However, the court of final appeal does not hold a position of fact-finding as long as it is not a matter of ex officio examination, but does not hold a position of fact-finding. However, it is only to determine the legitimacy of evidence determination and fact-finding conducted by the second instance court which is a fact-finding court, and the fact-finding court has a binding effect on the court of final appeal. As such, the grounds for fact-finding itself among the grounds for final appeal, such as the false statement under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act, can not

Such assertion cannot be a legitimate ground for retrial.

(2) As long as an argument on the grounds of appeal by an original judgment falls under a ground for rejection of a trial as provided by the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, the original judgment cannot be said to have omitted the judgment on the grounds of appeal (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da502, Feb. 12, 2009). Thus, the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act cannot be deemed to exist in the judgment subject to a retrial.

Therefore, the part concerning the grounds for retrial under Article 451 (1) 7 of the Civil Procedure Act among the lawsuits for retrial of this case shall be dismissed, and the part concerning the grounds for retrial under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be dismissed. However, in the disposition of this case, the purport that the request for retrial shall be dismissed is indicated, and the costs for retrial shall be borne by the losing party. It