1. Article 451 of the Civil Procedure Act concerning the Gwangju High Court, the Jeonju High Court, 2007Na4450, among the lawsuits for retrial of this case.

1. Determination of the original judgment

A. The plaintiff confirmed the judgment of the Jeonju District Court of Gwangju, 2007Na4450, the Jeonju District Court 2007Gahap7576, and the plaintiff purchased the apartment in this case, and the plaintiff is also residing in the apartment in this case, and the apartment in this case is owned by the plaintiff. Since C (the husband of the defendant) and the defendant occupy the apartment in this case without permission, they claim that they occupy each part of the attached drawing(a), (b), and (c) after moving into the apartment in this case without permission, and claim against the defendant that they occupy the apartment in the attached drawing(a), (b), and (c) and the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent during the period of possession of the apartment in this case. However, the judgment against the plaintiff was rendered against the defendant on the grounds that the plaintiff cannot be deemed as the owner of the apartment in this case.

In this regard, although the plaintiff appealed to the Jeonju District Court 2007Na4450, the judgment dismissing the appeal was sentenced (the expanded claim is dismissed; hereinafter referred to as "the judgment on the first review") and the plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court 2008Da77306, but the judgment on the first review became final and conclusive on December 24, 2008 as the appeal was dismissed.

B. On December 30, 2008, the Plaintiff was sentenced to the above Supreme Court Decision 2008Da77306 Decided Gwangju High Court Decision 2008Da77306. On December 30, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a petition against the Defendant for a retrial seeking the revocation of the first review decision by the Jeonju District Court Decision 2008Na40, which was sentenced on July 3, 2009 (hereinafter “the second review decision”) and filed a final appeal with the Supreme Court Decision 2009Da54164, but the second review decision became final and conclusive on October 29, 2009 by dismissing the final appeal.

2. Grounds for retrial of the Plaintiff’s assertion

A. Since each judgment subject to a retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act has omitted a judgment on important matters as follows, each of the judgment subject to a retrial is subject to the Civil Procedure Act.