1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

claim, purport of claim,

1. Determination as to whether there is existence of the findings of reexamination

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion lies in the judgment subject to a retrial that constitutes “when documents and other articles used as evidence for the judgment have been forged or altered,” as provided by Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “In the case of subparagraphs 4 through 7 of paragraph (1), a suit for retrial may be filed only when a judgment of conviction or judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence has become final and conclusive or a final and conclusive judgment of final conviction or imposition of a fine for negligence cannot be rendered for reasons other than lack of evidence.”

Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “In order to claim a re-examination under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act, a lawsuit seeking re-examination must be instituted and proved together that the requirements prescribed under Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act have been met, and a lawsuit claiming a re-examination under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act is unlawful without satisfying these requirements (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Da873, Aug. 29, 2016). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant satisfied the requirements prescribed under Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act in relation to the foregoing grounds for re-examination. Therefore, the lawsuit in this case is an incidental law.

2. As such, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.