(영문) 대전고등법원 (청주) 2018.07.03 2017재나55

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전고등법원 (청주) 2018.07.03 2017재나55

해고무효확인

Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

Reasons

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are apparent in records or obvious to this court:

On May 23, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on the ground that “The dismissal of the Defendant against the Plaintiff on July 15, 2011, which was confirmed by the Defendant, was null and void, and the Defendant filed a lawsuit on the ground that the Plaintiff would pay the Plaintiff an amount equivalent to KRW 22,264,068 per month from July 15, 201 to the date the Plaintiff is reinstated,” which was dismissed by the court of first instance on November 21, 2012.

B. Accordingly, on December 12, 2012, the Plaintiff appealed as Daejeon High Court (Cheongju) 2012Na3198, but was sentenced to a judgment dismissing the appeal by the appellate court on August 27, 2013. On September 11, 2013, the lower court’s order to dismiss the petition for final appeal issued on September 27, 2013 by the presiding judge of the appellate court on the ground that the Plaintiff’s appeal was made on September 27, 2013 but the rejection order was rejected, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 14, 2013.

(hereinafter the above judgment of the appellate court is hereinafter referred to as "the judgment of the appellate court") 2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the argument is against a number of Supreme Court Decisions 2004Da16280, Jun. 27, 2013; 201Da3061, Nov. 15, 2007; 201Da42324, Oct. 27, 201; thus, there are grounds for retrial falling under Article 451(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a retrial.

B. The grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act of the relevant legal doctrine refers to cases where a final and conclusive judgment prior to the filing of a new judgment conflicts with a final and conclusive judgment rendered prior to the res judicata of the judgment subject to a new judgment, and where “when a final and conclusive judgment prior to the filing of a new judgment conflicts with a final and conclusive judgment rendered prior to the filing of a new judgment” refers to cases where a final and conclusive judgment prior to the filing of a final and conclusive judgment affects

참조조문

-민사소송법 제451조 제1항 제10호

유사 판례

-대전고등법원(청주) 2019.06.05 2018재나38

-대법원 2010. 07. 15. 선고 2010재두158 판결

-서울고등법원 2016.07.08 2015재나847

-대법원 1994. 8. 26. 선고 94재다383 판결

-서울고등법원 2010.01.29 2009재나679