1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

1. The Plaintiff, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for damages by the Ulsan District Court 2014 Ghana4799, and the Ulsan District Court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on June 10, 2015.

Therefore, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Ulsan District Court 2015Na21639, but this Court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on October 22, 2015 (hereinafter “the ruling on review”).

On November 12, 2015, the judgment subject to review became final and conclusive on November 12, 2015 because the Plaintiff did not appeal against this.

2. Determination as to the request for retrial

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that “The judges belonging to the Defendant did not disclose the facts despite the Plaintiff’s perjury in the four-time loan lawsuit against B, and the Defendant is obligated to pay damages to the Plaintiff. Nevertheless, the judgment subject to a retrial omitted the judgment on the above assertion by the Plaintiff. Therefore, there exists a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.”

B. (1) According to Article 456(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, a lawsuit for retrial shall be instituted within 30 days from the date the party to the lawsuit becomes final and conclusive and the grounds for retrial become known. If an original copy of the judgment is served on an attorney, 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 the judgment was served. Thus, if the judgment becomes final and conclusive thereafter, the period for filing a lawsuit for retrial on the grounds for evading judgment under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 92Da33930, Sept. 28, 1993). According to the foregoing legal doctrine, the facts that the instant judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on November 12, 2015 are as seen earlier, and this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion.