1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

The defendant asserts that there are grounds for retrial for omission of judgment under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to review.

The proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that a party may not file a lawsuit for retrial if he/she has asserted a ground for retrial by an appeal or fails to know it, and the party should be deemed to have known when he/she was served the original copy of the judgment whether there exists a ground for retrial omitted in a judgment.

According to the records, although the defendant appealed on May 4, 201, the original copy of the judgment subject to a retrial was served, the defendant's appeal was dismissed on July 28, 2011. As such, the defendant cannot file a lawsuit for retrial on the ground that "if the defendant served the original copy of the judgment subject to a retrial and filed a final appeal, as the above recognized facts, the defendant constitutes "when he alleged or did not know it, by means of an appeal" under the proviso to Article 451 (1) of

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition.