beta
Text
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff, who became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of KRW 300,000,000,000 with this court 2015Gahap24123. On September 29, 2016, the court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds that it is reasonable to deem the Defendant does not borrow KRW 300,000,000 from the Plaintiff, etc., unlike the written confirmation (Evidence A3) in light of the witness’s testimony, etc. and the overall purport of the pleading. The said judgment became final and conclusive on October 21, 2016, is significant in this court.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that, based on C’s false testimony, the judgment subject to a retrial has grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act (when the false statement by a witness, expert witness, or interpreter or the false statement by a party or legal representative by the party’s newspaper becomes evidence of the judgment), the judgment subject to a retrial should be revoked.
3. Determination on the legitimacy of the litigation for retrial of this case
(a) In cases falling under subparagraphs 4 through 7 of Article 451 of the Civil Procedure Act among the grounds for retrial under Article 451 (1) of the same Act, a lawsuit may be instituted only when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of a fine for negligence has become final and conclusive, or when a final and conclusive judgment of conviction or a fine
(Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act. Article 451(2) of the same Act aims to prevent the harmful effects of the other party’s lawsuit. Thus, in the grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1)4 through 7, if the above requirements are not satisfied, the lawsuit for retrial based on the relevant grounds is unlawful. Thus, the grounds for a retrial under Articles 451(1)4 through 7 of the same Act should be dismissed without examining whether or not there exists any ground for retrial under subparagraphs 4 through
In addition, the facts constituting lawful requirements under the above paragraph (2) are guilty by the parties who filed a lawsuit for retrial under the above subparagraphs 4 through 7.