1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

1. Determination of the original judgment

A. On October 18, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking restoration of honor and revocation of a disposition rejecting a claim for compensation filed by the Defendant on August 22, 201, with the Seoul Administrative Court Decision 201Guhap34689, which was rendered by the Defendant, on August 22, 2011, but was sentenced to dismissal judgment on November 29, 2012.

B. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed by Seoul High Court No. 2013Nu5632, but was sentenced to a judgment dismissing an appeal on August 22, 2014 (the instant judgment subject to a retrial).

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2014Du12499, but was sentenced to a judgment dismissing the appeal on January 15, 2015.

Accordingly, the instant judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the litigation for retrial of this case

A. The judgment subject to a retrial by the Plaintiff did not sufficiently examine evidence, etc. submitted by the Plaintiff, and rejected the Plaintiff’s claim based on only the Defendant’s false assertion. As such, there exist grounds for retrial under Article 8(2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, Article 451(1)6 (when documents or other items as evidence of the judgment were forged or altered), Article 7 (when false statement by a witness, appraiser, or interpreter, or false statement by a party or legal representative by the party’s newspaper becomes evidence of the judgment), and Article 9 (when omitting judgment on important matters that may affect the judgment), respectively.

나. 판단 ⑴ 민사소송법 제451조 제1항 제6, 7호 재심사유의 존부 ㈎ 민사소송법 제451조 제1항 제6, 7호를 재심사유로 삼아 재심의 소를 제기하기 위해서는 문서위조나 위증 등에 관하여 유죄의 판결 또는 과태료 부과의 재판이 확정되거나 증거부족 외의 이유로 유죄의 확정판결 등을 할 수 없을 것이 요구된다(민사소송법 제451조 제2항). ㈏ 그런데 이 사건에서 이 부분과 관련하여 문서위조나 위증 등으로 유죄의 확정판결 등이 있었다는 점에 관하여 아무런 주장ㆍ증명도 없다.

Therefore, it is true.