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 August 26, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants, including the restoration of land to original state, etc., Jeju District Court 201Gahap25444, which sought a judgment as to the aforementioned purport of the claim. On February 2, 2012, the court of first instance rendered a judgment that “The part of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Defendant, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for confirmation of ownership against the Defendant, the part of each registered titleholder’s claim for cancellation of the registration of change of ownership, and the part of each claim for information disclosure, are all dismissed, and all of the remainder of the Defendant’

C. On August 22, 2012, the appellate court appealed against the above judgment of the first instance. On August 22, 2012, the appellate court rendered a judgment to the effect that all the Plaintiff’s appeals are dismissed (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to a retrial”) and received an authentic copy of the said judgment on August 31, 2012.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed against the instant judgment subject to a retrial, but on November 29, 2012, sentenced to Supreme Court Decision 2012Da201892 Decided November 29, 201, that the instant judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

2. Determination as to the existence of a ground for retrial

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that “A public official in charge of the Defendant has forged the relevant registration and may be admitted according to the relevant evidence,” and the instant judgment subject to a retrial was omitted.” This seems to constitute grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. According to Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act on the grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act, “when a document constituting evidence for judgment has been forged” is deemed as one of the grounds for a retrial. However, the crime of “in this case” under Article 451(2) of the same Act.