1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

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:

On May 28, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant with Jeju District Court 2013Gahap1286 on May 28, 2013, stating that “A public official affiliated with the Defendant, etc. illegally acquired land divided from B orchard 7064 square meters of land cadastre’s administrative code by forging the identification number of land cadastre, and paid only compensation calculated under the Plaintiff’s ownership, so the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount indicated in the purport of the claim corresponding to the difference between the reasonable compensation and the compensation already paid,” and the court of first instance rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on January 9, 2014.

B. On June 11, 2014, the Plaintiff filed an appeal under this Court ( Jeju) No. 2014Na101, which was dissatisfied with the above judgment, and this court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal.

Although the Plaintiff appealed against the above appellate judgment, on August 26, 2014, Supreme Court Decision 2014Da214427 Decided the dismissal of appeal was rendered and the above appellate judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

C. On March 30, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for a retrial against the instant appellate judgment under this Court’s second instance judgment ( Jeju). However, this court rendered a judgment dismissing the lawsuit for retrial on March 23, 2016 (hereinafter “instant judgment subject to retrial”) (hereinafter “instant judgment”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on April 9, 2016 due to the Plaintiff’s failure to file an appeal against the said judgment.

2. Determination as to the existence of a ground for retrial

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Defendant submitted as evidence a forged land cadastre or a certified copy of the register in the case subject to review, and accordingly, the judgment against the Plaintiff was rendered. Accordingly, there were grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act in the instant judgment subject

(b) judgment;