1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

1. According to the records of this case, the following facts are recognized.

A. On March 5, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a judgment against the Defendant as to the same content as the purport of the instant claim against the Daejeon District Court Hongsung Branch 2012Ga6134. The said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim on March 5, 2013.

B. The Plaintiff appealed to Daejeon District Court 2013Na5488 on September 11, 2013, and the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal.

(hereinafter referred to as the "case subject to review") c.

On October 4, 2013, the Plaintiff appealed to Supreme Court Decision 2013Da80115 regarding a judgment subject to a retrial, but the Supreme Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on January 24, 2014, and the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive as it is.

On August 7, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for retrial of this case.

2. Determination on the grounds for retrial

A. The plaintiff asserts that there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act (when a judgment was omitted on important matters that may affect the judgment) in the judgment subject to retrial.

The proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a lawsuit for retrial may not be instituted when a party has asserted a ground for retrial by an appeal, or fails to know it, even if he/she knows it. In light of the above provision, a lawsuit for retrial cannot be instituted against the judgment of the court below which became final and conclusive as the ground for appeal is alleged as the ground for appeal. On the other hand, barring any special circumstance, whether a judgment has been omitted or omitted can be known at the time of being served with the authentic copy of the judgment. Thus, if an omission in judgment was not so asserted as

Ultimately, barring any special circumstance, the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act are legitimate grounds for retrial against the lower judgment regardless of whether the grounds for appeal were asserted in the final appeal.