1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

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

On August 28, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the claim for the payment of the instant goods, and the court of first instance rendered a judgment of partial acceptance of the Plaintiff’s claim that “the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff 2,126,385 won and the interest calculated at the rate of 6% per annum from July 5, 2014 to August 28, 2015, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.”

B. The Plaintiff and the Defendant appealed against the judgment of the first instance. On July 14, 2016, the appellate court partially accepted the Plaintiff’s appeal, and rendered a judgment that “the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the money that orders additional payment under the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 7,192,625, and the amount calculated by the annual rate of KRW 6% from July 5, 2014 to July 14, 2016, and 20% from the next day to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to a retrial”).

C. The Defendant filed an appeal against the instant judgment subject to a retrial (Supreme Court Decision 2016Da243801), and the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing an appeal on December 15, 2016, and the instant judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on the same day.

2. The legality of the litigation for retrial of this case

A. Although the purport of the Defendant’s assertion is false, there is a ground for retrial that misleads the Plaintiff of facts in violation of the rules of evidence.

B. A lawsuit on a retrial on a final judgment that became final and conclusive is permitted only when there exist grounds for retrial stipulated under each subparagraph of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act. Thus, if the grounds for a retrial do not constitute such grounds, the lawsuit on retrial is unlawful.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da31307 delivered on October 25, 1996). However, the grounds alleged by the Defendant are merely the purport that the instant judgment subject to a retrial was rejected.