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 are apparent in records: (a) the determination of the original judgment is final and conclusive.

On October 8, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for damages as Busan District Court Decision 2014Gapo25047, and the said court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the first instance judgment”) to the effect that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 3,050,000 won and the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from November 30, 2009 to October 8, 2014, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.”

B. The Defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance court and appealed as Busan District Court 2014Na16606, Jul. 1, 2015, “The decision of the first instance court is revoked. The Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed.” (hereinafter “the judgment of the first instance court”) which cited the Defendant’s appeal.

The plaintiff appealed against the judgment of the appellate court, but on November 12, 2015, the above appeal was dismissed by Supreme Court Decision 2015Da46751 Decided November 12, 2015, which became final and conclusive.

C. On December 14, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking a retrial on the instant judgment subject to a retrial.

2. The plaintiff's assertion received a request from his father C to lend KRW 3 million to the defendant, and requested the defendant to lend KRW 3 million to C in the defendant's name, and then remitted the plaintiff's money to the defendant KRW 3 million to the defendant.

Since then, the Defendant did not return 3050,000 won to the Plaintiff even after having received reimbursement from C, but embezzled the above 3050,000 won by pretending the Defendant’s transaction details as if the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the above 3050,000 won.

On July 13, 2015, 2015, after the sentence for judgment was rendered, the Defendant found the Plaintiff and bullyinged the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff was indicted as a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Mono-Mano-Ma5761) (Mono-Mano-Mano-Mano-Mano-Mano-Mano-Mano-Mano-Mano-Mano-Mano-Ma No. 201) in response to self-defense by the Plaintiff, and suffered damages from the Defendant

3. The plaintiff's assertion of judgment.