beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's petition for retrial is dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The following facts are apparent in records:
On March 30, 2002, the Plaintiff, instead of receiving KRW 130,00,000 from the Defendant with respect to the traffic accident listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant traffic accident”), agreed to waive all rights to the Defendant and not raise any civil lawsuit or objection (hereinafter “instant agreement”).
B. Since the Plaintiff’s agreement in this case constitutes an unfair juristic act and thus null and void or the declaration of intention was cancelled due to mistake, the Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff was liable to compensate the Plaintiff for additional damages of KRW 5,011,880 and damages incurred therefrom, which are the additional damages caused by the instant traffic accident, and filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for damages claim against the Daejeon District Court Hongsung Branch 2009Gau3221, and the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s lawsuit on October 19, 2010.
C. Accordingly, while the Plaintiff appealed to this Court No. 2010Na17244, this Court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on January 26, 2011 (hereinafter “the ruling on review”). The Plaintiff re-appealed to Supreme Court Decision 201Da17656, but the Supreme Court rendered a ruling dismissing the appeal on May 26, 201, on the grounds that the instant case does not fall under any subparagraph of Article 3 of the Trial of Small Claims Act, the said judgment on review became final and conclusive on May 26, 2011.
2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion on the grounds for retrial is that the case subject to retrial constitutes an essential co-litigation, but all co-litigants did not become the Plaintiff, and thus, they were excluded from the judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion that the agreement in this case is a juristic act and an unfair juristic act contrary to social order, and thus invalid.
Therefore, there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)3 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial.