1. The plaintiff (the plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Plaintiff).

purport, purport, and.

1. The facts acknowledged following the judgment subject to a retrial and the final and conclusive judgment are clear in records or obvious to this court.

The plaintiff (hereinafter "the plaintiff") filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the confirmation of invalidity of a resolution on all agenda made by the residents' general meeting that implemented on October 24, 2009 by the defendant on October 24, 2009. However, on June 25, 2010, Suwon District Court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial that dismissed the plaintiff's claim, and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 20, 2010.

B. On November 7, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the revocation of the judgment subject to a retrial under Article 451(1)3 of the Civil Procedure Act, asserting that there was a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)3 of the Suwon District Court, asserting that there was a ground for retrial under the premise that the J is a lawful representative of the Defendant. On February 17, 201, the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the petition for retrial on the ground that the Plaintiff’s ground that there was no ground for retrial as asserted by the Plaintiff was not recognized (hereinafter “prior judgment”).

Therefore, the plaintiff appealed to Seoul High Court No. 2012Na27683, but the above prior judgment became final and conclusive as the Seoul High Court's rejection order of the petition of appeal.

2. The content of the legal judgment contained in the order of the final and conclusive judgment which became final and conclusive as res judicata has become binding as a new standard regulating the parties and the courts. Thus, if the same matter is a matter of litigation subsequent to the case, the parties cannot make any assertion contrary to it, and the court cannot make any decision contrary to it or inconsistent with it by re-examination.

This is the res judicata of the final judgment.

The plaintiff asserts the same ground for retrial as that asserted in the preceding case and again makes a request for retrial. This argument cannot be accepted against the res judicata of the preceding judgment dismissing the same ground for retrial.