1. Among the lawsuits for retrial of this case, the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be dismissed.

2. This.

1. The following facts are apparent in the records of the judgment subject to a retrial:

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming return of investment deposit, etc. against the Defendant on March 19, 2010, the lower court rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff on March 19, 2010. Accordingly, the Defendant appealed from this Court No. 2010Na8574, and the Plaintiff added the conjunctive purport of the claim as stated in the above purport of claim at the appellate court. On November 30, 2012, the lower court prior to the review dismissed the Plaintiff’s primary claim, and rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff partially citing the conjunctive claim (hereinafter “subject to a judgment”).

B. On December 13, 2012, the Plaintiff served an authentic copy of the judgment subject to a retrial, and thereafter appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2013Da5466, but on April 25, 2013, the final appeal was dismissed, and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff's employee G had omitted judgment on the above core facts even though he asserted several times through preparatory documents and legal arguments concerning the crime that the defendant's employee G acquired 65,000,000 won from the plaintiff as a printing right, which constitutes grounds for retrial as provided by Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. A lawsuit for retrial shall be filed within 30 days from the date a party becomes aware of the grounds for retrial after the judgment became final and conclusive (see Article 456(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). In the event an original copy of judgment is served, barring any special circumstance, the party becomes aware of the existence of grounds for retrial by being aware of whether the judgment was omitted at the time when the original copy of judgment was served, barring any special circumstance. Therefore, where the judgment becomes final and conclusive thereafter, the period of