1. Among the lawsuits for retrial of this case, the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)5 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be dismissed.

2.

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

Plaintiff

On December 8, 2010, etc. filed a lawsuit against the defendant against the Incheon District Court 2010Da324961, which sought damages from a tort, and the above court rendered a judgment accepting the claim of the plaintiff et al. on May 4, 201.

B. The Defendant, who was dissatisfied with the above judgment, appealed to the Incheon District Court 201Na8874, but on May 31, 2012, the judgment dismissing the Defendant’s appeal (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to a retrial”) was rendered.

C. The Defendant appealed to the instant judgment subject to a retrial, and appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2012Da58494, but the instant judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive upon the final judgment rendered on September 13, 2012.

2. Grounds for retrial and determination

A. The Defendant’s assertion ① was obstructed in the submission of evidence, such as voice recording files, which is a means of attack and defense, that may affect the judgment in a litigation proceeding that forms the basis for the judgment subject to a retrial. As such, there exists grounds for retrial falling under Article 451(1)5 of the Civil Procedure Act that “when another person’s act subject to criminal punishment interferes with the submission of means of attack and defense that may affect the judgment,” under Article 451(

② In the case of Incheon District Court 201 High Court 201 High Court 201 High Court 5491, the above judgment was rendered to the Defendant and became the basis for the instant judgment subject to a retrial. In the case of Incheon District Court 2012No1047, which is the appellate court of the instant case, the judgment of the first instance was reversed by the sentence that “the Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000,” and the above judgment of the first instance was changed. In the instant judgment subject to a retrial, there were grounds for retrial corresponding to “when the judgment of a criminal case, which forms the basis for the judgment, was changed by another judgment” under Article 451(1)

③ The instant case.