2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff, or Plaintiff for retrial).

A. On August 10, 2004, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant to comply with the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer regarding the instant real estate, and was sentenced to the judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on February 17, 2005 (the first instance judgment).

B. The plaintiff appealed against the above judgment, and the defendant also filed a counterclaim at the appellate court. On December 14, 2005, the appellate court revoked the judgment of the first instance court, accepted the plaintiff's claim of the main lawsuit, and rendered a judgment that dismissed the defendant's claim of the counterclaim (the judgment of retrial).

C. Although the Defendant appealed against the above judgment, the Supreme Court dismissed the Defendant’s final appeal on April 16, 2006, which became final and conclusive.

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. The defendant asserts that there are grounds for retrial falling under Article 451(1)4, 6, 7, and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act, such as forging official documents and using them as evidence, and misunderstanding the legal principles as to the possession of a third party and violating the rules of evidence.

B. Except where the grounds for retrial arose after a final judgment became final and conclusive, no lawsuit for retrial shall be instituted when five years have passed after the final and conclusive judgment (Article 456(3) and (4) of the Civil Procedure Act). The judgment subject to retrial becomes final and conclusive on April 16, 2006, as seen earlier. The instant lawsuit was instituted on November 4, 2015 after the five years have passed thereafter, and the grounds for retrial asserted by the Defendant cannot be deemed to have arisen after the final and conclusive judgment subject to retrial. Thus, the instant lawsuit for retrial cannot be deemed lawful.

3. According to the conclusion, we decide to dismiss the lawsuit of this case for retrial as per the Disposition above.