logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 춘천지방법원강릉지원 2019.07.09 2018재나119
증서진부 확인
Text

1. The plaintiff's petition for retrial is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are apparent or apparent in records in this court.

The plaintiff (hereinafter "the plaintiff") filed a lawsuit against the defendant (the defendant for review; hereinafter "the defendant") to confirm the authenticity of "the annexed list" in the attached Form No. 2017Kadan904 against the defendant (the defendant for review; hereinafter "the defendant").

B. On September 12, 2017, the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing a lawsuit on the grounds that the document stating the name, address, and contact information of several persons including the Defendant is merely a document stating the name, address, and contact information of the Defendant, and thus, it does not directly prove the existence of a certain legal relationship from the content thereof, and thus, it cannot be the object of a lawsuit confirming the authenticity of the document.

C. On May 15, 2018, the appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal (hereinafter “the judgment on review”) against the judgment of the first instance, and appealed by this Court No. 2017Na1391. The appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s appeal was lodged by Supreme Court Decision 2018Da28167, but the Supreme Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on September 13, 2018 pursuant to Article 5 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure of Appeal, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 14, 2018.

2. The judgment of this Court

A. In the judgment subject to a retrial by the Plaintiff, there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act (when documents and other articles used as evidence for the judgment have been forged or altered) and Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act (when the judgment was omitted on important matters affecting the judgment).

B. The Plaintiff asserts that there is a ground stipulated in Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act in the instant judgment subject to a retrial, since the Plaintiff’s judgment on the grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act was forged.

In this regard, the documents and other articles, as evidence of the judgment, are included in Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act.

arrow