1. All of the lawsuits for retrial of this case shall be dismissed.

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

1. Determination of the original judgment

A. On May 2, 2008, the Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the payment of the loan amounting to KRW 40 million and damages for delay thereof (U.S. District Court 2007Dadan43534) and received a favorable judgment from the above court on May 2, 2008.

The defendant appealed against this judgment and appealed as Suwon District Court 2008Na1174, and the above court modified the judgment of the court of first instance to the effect that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff Eul 20 million won with 5% interest per annum from December 27, 2007 to June 17, 2009, and 20% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment, and that the plaintiff Eul's claim and the remaining claims of the plaintiff Eul are dismissed."

B. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2009Da52236, but on November 12, 2009, the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on the same day as the judgment of dismissal of final appeal was rendered.

【Evidence of Evidence Nos. 1 and 2 of this Court】

2. The plaintiffs' assertion ① The defendant asserted that the family check submitted by the plaintiffs as Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 was modified in the case subject to review, and that the Seoul Central District Prosecutor's Office rendered a decision that the plaintiffs were not suspected of being guilty of the lack of evidence at the Seoul Central Prosecutor's Office around December 2009.

(2) In addition, since the defendant submitted as evidence the payment date of household checks by altering the case subject to review, there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to review.

3. Determination

A. The plaintiffs' assertion ① is allowed only when the plaintiffs' assertion falls under the grounds stipulated in each subparagraph of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. The plaintiffs' assertion does not fall under any of the grounds for retrial stipulated in the above provision.

B. Next, we examine the plaintiffs' assertion ②

Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "documents and other documents as evidence of the judgment."