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.

On June 29, 2009, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming joint payment of KRW 18,500,000 for damages against the Defendant and C and its delay damages (Seoul Central District Court 2009Dada190611) and was sentenced to a favorable judgment on September 23, 2009.

B. On June 18, 2010, the Defendant appealed against the above judgment and subsequently filed an appeal (the Plaintiff’s claim was reduced to the amount stated in the column of the above claim while the appeal is pending). This court revoked the judgment of the first instance on June 18, 2010, and declared a judgment subject to a retrial to dismiss

C. The Plaintiff appealed to the judgment subject to a retrial (Supreme Court Decision 2010Da56708). The Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on September 30, 2010, which became final and conclusive.

On the other hand, on June 8, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for retrial of this case by asserting grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act, stating that “when documents and other articles used as evidence for judgment have been forged or altered,” and “when the judgment was omitted on important matters affecting the judgment” under subparagraph 9 of the same paragraph.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the litigation for retrial of this case

A. The Plaintiff asserts that the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act, on the grounds that the judgment subject to retrial dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim by using it as evidence of fact-finding, even though the receipt submitted by the Defendant (documents with the G Licensed Real Estate Agent H’s seal affixed to the seat of witness) was forged.

On the other hand, Article 451 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides "when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of a fine for negligence has become final or when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of a fine for negligence has become final or when a final or conclusive judgment of conviction or a fine for negligence has been imposed for reasons other than lack of evidence."