1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff, or Plaintiff for retrial).

1. Whether the litigation for retrial of this case is legitimate

A. Reopening of procedure can only be brought against a final judgment that has become final and conclusive, a lawsuit for retrial against a final and conclusive judgment is unlawful, and a lawsuit for retrial is not legitimate even if the judgment becomes final and conclusive between the lawsuits filed prior to the final and conclusive judgment that were not dismissed.

(See Supreme Court Decision 80Da1132 delivered on July 8, 1980). B.

According to the records, the following facts are recognized.

1) The Defendant brought a lawsuit for retrial against the instant court’s 2014Na311 (principal lawsuit), 2015Na369 (principal lawsuit) and 2014Na35104 (Counterclaim) judgment in this Court. This Court rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s request for retrial on February 18, 2016 (hereinafter “the subject judgment for retrial”).

(2) On February 29, 2016, the instant judgment was served on the Defendant on February 25, 2016. (2) On February 29, 2016, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for retrial regarding the judgment subject to a retrial.

C. In light of the circumstances, the judgment subject to a retrial becomes final and conclusive on March 11, 2016, 14 days after the date the judgment was delivered to the Defendant, and the Defendant brought a lawsuit for retrial in the instant case before the judgment subject to a retrial becomes final and conclusive, and thus, the instant lawsuit for retrial is unlawful

(1) The court below's decision to dismiss the petition for retrial of this case as to the judgment subject to retrial of this case is justifiable, since the court below's decision to dismiss the petition for retrial of this case is not a final judgment, but a quasi-adjudication is against "a protocol of compromise, a protocol of waiver or recognition of claim," or "a ruling or order that may be contested by an immediate appeal," and thus, it is not unlawful even if the defendant's above assertion itself is based on the above argument itself).