beta
Text
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;
purport, purport, ..
Reasons
1. On May 8, 2007, the Plaintiff filed a suit of objection against the Defendant with Ulsan District Court 2007da7446, and was sentenced to a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on May 8, 2007. The Defendant appealed with the Ulsan District Court 2007Na1890, but on May 29, 2008, the judgment dismissing an appeal (the judgment subject to a retrial) was rendered on May 29, 2008, and the Defendant again appealed with the Supreme Court 2008Da42669, but the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on September 11, 2008.
Although the Defendant filed a lawsuit for a retrial on the judgment subject to a retrial with the Ulsan District Court 2016Na4938, the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the lawsuit for a retrial (the judgment subject to a retrial). As to this, the Defendant appealed with the Supreme Court 2017Da34004, but the judgment subject to a retrial was dismissed, and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on October 30, 2017.
2. Determination as to the request for retrial
A. In light of the proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, a suit for a retrial cannot be filed against the judgment of the court of final appeal which became final and conclusive on the ground of appeal for which the judgment of the court of final appeal was rendered on the ground of appeal, and if the judgment of the court of final appeal was omitted, it can be known if the original judgment was served on the original judgment and read the grounds of the judgment. Thus, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance, it could be asserted as the grounds of final appeal since the omission of judgment could be known when the original judgment was served on the original judgment, and it could not be asserted as the grounds of final appeal unless there is any special circumstance. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of final appeal
I would like to say.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da4205, Jun. 29, 2007). The purport of the proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act stipulating the supplement of a new trial and the trial for non-trial trials are rendered.