1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

1. The judgment subject to a retrial by the Plaintiff is to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant by deeming that the Defendant was not a party to an international marriage brokerage contract with the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant contract”).

However, after the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive, the defendant led to the confession that the defendant himself/herself was a party to the contract of this case with the plaintiff in the Dongbcheon-si District Court 2017Gau4695, and the investigation of the defendant in the Seoul Northern District Prosecutors' Office No. 2011 type No. 41859, Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office No. 2014 type No. 8848, which revealed that the defendant was a party to the

Therefore, in the judgment subject to a retrial, there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7, 8, and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act, and such grounds should be revoked.

2. A lawsuit for a retrial on the existence or absence of a ground for retrial may be brought to the court where there exist grounds for retrial listed in the subparagraphs of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

We examine whether there are grounds for retrial in the judgment subject to a retrial.

A. Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act provides for the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7 of the same Act as “when the false statement by a witness, appraiser, or interpreter or when the false statement by a party or legal representative by the party’s newspaper or by the party’s examination becomes an evidence of the judgment”

However, according to the records, the judgment subject to a retrial is merely a document or video evidence, i.e., evidence of evidence Nos. 1 through 9, 18, 31, 32, and 35 (including paper numbers) as evidence that served as the basis for the judgment, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the false statement by a witness, appraiser, interpreter, or a party or legal representative by the party’s questioning or by the party’s testimony was evidence of the judgment subject to a retrial.

Even if the defendant's assertion in the oral proceedings was false and that it influenced the conclusion of the judgment subject to a retrial, that assertion.