1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

1. Determination of the judgment subject to a retrial, and each of the following facts by the Plaintiff’s request for a retrial is apparent, recorded, and accepted by this court.

On August 21, 2009, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants seeking damages, etc. as Seoul Western District Court 2009Kadan50912.

On May 3, 2011, the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing the lawsuit, and the Plaintiff appealed as Seoul Western District Court 201Na6001.

On November 3, 2011, the appellate court rendered a ruling to dismiss all the claims of the plaintiff that had been changed in exchange in the appellate court against the defendants.

On December 2, 2011, the original copy of the judgment subject to review was sent to the Plaintiff by public notice, and the service became effective at the time of December 17, 201.

On December 29, 2011, the Plaintiff filed an appeal against B and E among the Defendants on December 29, 201, as Supreme Court Decision 2012Da5582, but, on April 13, 2012, the Plaintiff’s appeal was dismissed by a judgment of non-trial trial, and the judgment was served on the Plaintiff on April 18, 2012.

B. Accordingly, the part against Defendant C among the judgment subject to a retrial becomes final and conclusive from December 17, 201 to 14 days after the delivery date of the original copy of the judgment subject to a retrial against the Plaintiff, and the part against Defendant B and E was final and conclusive on April 18, 2012.

C. On April 11, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for reexamination of the instant case.

2. Whether a lawsuit for retrial is lawful;

A. Article 451(1)5 through 9 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a petition for retrial filed by the Plaintiff constitutes a ground for retrial under Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. However, upon examining the specific grounds for retrial, the court that rendered the judgment subject to retrial did not hold the Defendants liable for damages, etc. due to erroneous determination of evidence, but rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim, and there is no ground for retrial under Article 451(1)5 through 9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

In addition, the part against Defendant C among the litigation for the retrial of this case shall be from the date when the judgment becomes final and conclusive.