1. Part concerning the ground for retrial under Article 451(1)4 through 7 of the Civil Procedure Act among the request for retrial of this case.

1. The following facts are apparent in the records of the judgment subject to a retrial:

The plaintiff, in his own name, deposited KRW 89,115,300 in the defendant bank account in the defendant bank account, and the defendant had an obligation to compensate the plaintiff for damages equivalent to the above amount because he had intentionally or by negligence. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant as Seoul Central District Court 2007Gahap112696, but was sentenced to dismissal of the plaintiff's claim by the above court on September 17, 2008.

B. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with this and appealed by this Court 2008Na98633, but on May 15, 2009, the judgment dismissing an appeal was rendered by this Court prior to the retrial (hereinafter “the judgment dismissing an appeal”). On May 27, 2009, the original judgment subject to a retrial was served on the Plaintiff.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2009Da42215, but on August 20, 2009, the argument on the grounds of appeal on August 20, 2009 falls under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Trial and Appeal, and thus, the said judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive.

2. Grounds for retrial and determination thereof

A. As to the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)4 through 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, the Plaintiff asserts that there exist grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)4 through 7 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial. As such, under Article 451(2) of the same Act, the Plaintiff may file a lawsuit for retrial only where “when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence becomes final and conclusive on the act subject to punishment, or when a final and conclusive judgment of conviction or a judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence cannot be rendered on the grounds other than lack of evidence,” and there is no proof of any assertion

Supreme Court Decision 2005Da58236 Decided January 12, 2006, Supreme Court Decision 2005Da58236 Decided September 14, 2006