1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are apparent or apparent to this court.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant against the Seoul Northern District Court 2015Kadan126364, and the above court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff on October 29, 2015, and the Defendant appealed as Seoul Northern District Court 2015Na35735, but the above court rendered a judgment that partially modified the order of the first instance judgment on November 18, 2016 on the ground that the instant real estate was delivered to the Plaintiff on March 23, 2016 according to the provisional execution of the first instance judgment (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to a retrial”).

B. The Defendant appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2017Da257302 regarding the instant judgment subject to review, but on October 31, 2017, the final appeal was dismissed and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

2. The defendant's assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant’s assertion is a forged document or modified document stating a false statement in the lease contract submitted by the Plaintiff as evidence in the judgment subject to a retrial. The instant judgment subject to a retrial has grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “A lawsuit may be brought in a retrial only when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of a fine for negligence has become final and conclusive or a final and conclusive judgment of a conviction or a fine for negligence cannot be made for reasons other than lack of evidence in the case of subparagraphs 4 through 7 of paragraph (1).”

Therefore, in order to claim the grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1)4 through 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, the grounds for a retrial should be asserted and proved together with the fact that the requirements under Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act have been satisfied,

A lawsuit seeking a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)4 through 7 of the Civil Procedure Act without satisfying the requirements is unlawful.

Supreme Court Decision 2006No. 1406 Decided September 14, 2006