logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.19 2014재가합263
노회소속증명서 무효확인 및 손해배상
Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are apparent in records or obvious to this court.

On September 17, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking confirmation of invalidity of a union membership certificate and compensation for damages. On September 17, 2014, the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s confirmation of invalidity of a union membership certificate and rendered a judgment dismissing the remainder of the claims (hereinafter “the judgment on review”).

B. On September 22, 2014, the Plaintiff served an original copy of the judgment subject to a retrial and did not appeal within 14 days, and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on October 7, 2014.

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

A. The Plaintiff’s argument that the judgment subject to a retrial is unlawful on the ground that the Defendant’s lawsuit confirming that the certificate of labor union affiliation issued by the Defendant is invalid, and that this part of the lawsuit was dismissed, and that the Plaintiff did not render a determination on this part, there exists a ground for retrial by omitting a judgment under Article 451

(A) The Plaintiff asserts that there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a retrial. However, there is no assertion as to whether the judgment subject to a retrial conflicts with any final judgment, and thus, the above grounds for a retrial should not be determined differently.

Judgment

A retrial lawsuit may not be instituted when either party has asserted the grounds by an appeal or has failed to do so with the knowledge of such grounds (proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). Here, the term “when the party has known of the existence of grounds for retrial” shall be construed to include not only the cases where an appeal is filed despite the knowledge of the existence of grounds for retrial, but also the cases where judgment becomes final and conclusive as it is because the appellate court did not make an appeal,

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Da29057 delivered on November 12, 1991, see Supreme Court Decision 91Da29057 delivered on November 12, 199.

arrow