1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's petition for retrial is dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

1. Whether the grounds for retrial of this case exist

A. The following facts are acknowledged in light of the purport of this Court or the entire pleadings:

1) On February 14, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of KRW 200,000,000 for loans with the Ulsan District Court 2012Da4724, U.S. District Court 2012. The said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on October 16, 2013 (hereinafter “the subject judgment for retrial”).

(2) On November 5, 2013, the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive as of November 5, 2013. 2) one of the grounds for dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim, which was one of the grounds for dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim, was convicted of the Defendant’s meeting minutes (No. 2, No. 21, the same as the Plaintiff’s husband) submitted by the Plaintiff as evidence of the leased fact by the U.S. District Court 2012 Godan1873, U.S. Supreme Court

hereinafter referred to as "related criminal cases";

(3) Meanwhile, E appealed to the first instance judgment of the relevant criminal case, as the Ulsan District Court 2013No848, and the said court reversed the first instance judgment on November 28, 2014, and rendered a judgment of innocence to E.

4 Prosecutor appealed against the above appellate judgment and appealed to the Supreme Court Decision 2014Do17008, but the Supreme Court rendered a dismissal judgment on June 11, 2015 and the judgment of innocence became final and conclusive.

5 The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for retrial on July 10, 2015, which was within 30 days from the date the judgment of innocence became final and conclusive, on the said criminal case.

B. In a criminal case related to the Plaintiff’s assertion, E received a final judgment of innocence, which constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7 and 8 of the Civil Procedure Act.

C. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows: (a) the part on “...” is identical to the part on “...” under the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the court’s explanation on this part is identical to the part on “......”

As seen earlier, the instant lawsuit for retrial is instituted.