beta
Text
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, ..
Reasons
The plaintiff asserts that there is a ground for retrial under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a retrial, since the defendant's failure to use and benefit from the leased object was solely attributable to his or her own cause, the defendant failed to render a judgment on the plaintiff's argument that monthly rent and management expenses should be paid to the plaintiff according to the lease agreement, just as in the case where the defendant received and used the leased object.
In light of the records, the proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that if a party asserts, or does not know, any ground for retrial by an appeal, it shall not be allowed to institute a lawsuit for retrial. Barring special circumstances, it shall be reasonable to view that the party received the original copy of the judgment to have known that there was a ground for a ground for a retrial in the judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 91Da29057, Nov. 12, 1991). According to the records, the Plaintiff received the original copy of the judgment in Busan District Court Decision 201Na1745, Apr. 3, 2012, and filed a final appeal against the above judgment on the 10th day of the same month.
6. The fact that the appeal was dismissed on July 11, 2012 and the judgment of the court of first instance became final and conclusive, and the plaintiff filed a lawsuit on July 11, 2012 on the above Busan District Court 201Na1745 and served the original copy of the judgment on January 29, 2013, and filed an appeal on the above judgment on January 31, 2013, but filed an appeal on the same year.
9. 13. Since the appeal is dismissed and the judgment above became final and conclusive, it is no longer possible for the plaintiff to file a lawsuit for retrial on the grounds as alleged above, since it falls under the case where the plaintiff alleged a ground for retrial by an appeal or did not know that it was known.
Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus it is so decided as per Disposition.