1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

1. Following the conclusion of the judgment subject to a retrial is apparent or obvious in records in this court.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking additional construction costs related to landscaping construction works, increase in construction costs due to price fluctuations, and indirect costs due to extension of construction period due to the extension of construction period under the Jeonju District Court’s Gunsan Branch Decision 2015Ga1084, and the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on April 21, 2017.

(hereinafter “the first instance judgment”). B.

On March 21, 2019, the plaintiff appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance by this Court (the preceding week) No. 2017Na10935, and this court rendered a judgment dismissing the plaintiff's appeal.

(hereinafter referred to as the "case subject to review") c.

The Plaintiff appealed against the judgment subject to a retrial and appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2019Da224948, but on July 11, 2019, the final appeal was dismissed on July 11, 2019, and the judgment was served on the Defendant on July 12, 2019, the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

2. The summary of the plaintiff's ground for a retrial is that the report (additional construction cost: 91,274,736 won; hereinafter "the report on calculation of this case") on the calculation of the subcontract price prepared by E, an incorporated association within the first instance court and the appellate court, unilaterally reflects the defendant's demand, and the plaintiff's evaluation result (additional construction cost: 1,125,681,634 won, evidence No. 16) submitted to the first instance court by the plaintiff individually and the appraisal result (Additional construction cost: 1,097, 370,000 won) prepared by the appraiser selected at the appellate court shows significant differences between the appraisal result (additional construction cost: 1,125,681,634 won, and evidence No. 16)

The omission of such judgment subject to a retrial constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act (when the judgment was omitted on important matters that may affect the judgment), and the plaintiff seeks a judgment identical to that stated in the purport of the request for retrial.

3. The litigation of this case is legitimate.