1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

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:

On April 4, 2016, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Defendant for a payment order claiming the refund of overdue rent and management fee of KRW 9.35 million and its delay damages.

On September 28, 2016, the court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on September 28, 2016 (hereinafter “the first instance judgment”) in the Busan District Court 2016Gau54, Busan District Court 2016.

B. The Plaintiff appealed against the judgment of the first instance as Busan District Court 2016Na10282, but the judgment dismissing the appeal was rendered on April 27, 2017 (hereinafter “the judgment on review”).

C. The Plaintiff filed another final appeal with Supreme Court Decision 2017Da18682 regarding the judgment subject to a retrial, but on July 27, 2017, the lower judgment was rendered on July 27, 2017.

Accordingly, the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

On August 24, 2017, the Plaintiff was dissatisfied with the judgment subject to reexamination and filed a lawsuit for reexamination of the instant case.

2. Grounds for retrial of the Plaintiff’s assertion

A. The judgment subject to a retrial, which dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on the ground that the Defendant was not a lessee, even though the Defendant was the representative director of the Plaintiff, violates the title and intellectual duty under Article 136(4) of the Civil Procedure Act, and the Defendant’s objection against the good faith principle, even if the Defendant responded to the suit in violation of the good faith principle, should be presented as

B. The judgment for retrial under Article 451(1)1 of the Civil Procedure Act, which determined that there is no evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion, is a violation of the principle of due process of law under Article 12(1) of the Constitution, since the existence of evidence is not a proper evidence

Therefore, there is a ground for retrial that constitutes “when a judgment court is not constituted under the law” under Article 451(1)1 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to review.

(c).