beta
Text
1. The plaintiff (the plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Plaintiff).
3. The first instance.
Reasons
1. According to the evidence Nos. 3-1 through 3-3, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of KRW 838,500,00 for loans with Ulsan Branch of Busan District Court 92 Ghana 26270, Feb. 8, 1993, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time. Thereafter, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on April 4, 201 for the extension of the extinctive prescription period of the claim based on the said final and conclusive judgment, but the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on October 25, 2011, but was sentenced to a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim on October 25, 201. Although the Plaintiff appealed, the Plaintiff appealed on August 30, 2012, but was dismissed by the Ulsan District Court 201Na71477.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that, upon the Plaintiff’s request for auction on October 5, 200, the extinctive prescription had been interrupted due to the Plaintiff’s claim based on the judgment No. 92 Ghana 26270, and thereafter, the Defendant’s motion for auction had dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim, the judgment of Ulsan District Court No. 2011No2676, which was the judgment subject to a retrial, for which the extinctive prescription had not run
On the other hand, the proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a lawsuit for a retrial shall not be instituted when a ground for a retrial has been asserted by an appeal or fails to assert it with knowledge thereof, and Article 451(3) of the same Act provides that a lawsuit for a retrial may not be instituted when an appellate court rendered a judgment on the merits of a case at an appellate trial. According to Article 451(1)3-2 of the same Act, the plaintiff asserted that the extinctive prescription has been interrupted by a request for auction on or around October 5, 2000 in the Ulsan District Court No. 2011Na7147, which is the appellate court of the judgment subject to a retrial, and the appellate court may recognize the fact that the appellate court rendered a judgment on the merits of the case
3. If so, the appeal of this case is unlawful, and thus, it is dismissed.