1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) who became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial (only hereinafter “Plaintiff”) filed a lawsuit for a retrial on July 6, 2011, which was rendered final and conclusive, but was rendered a judgment dismissing the judgment subject to a retrial, and was rendered a final and conclusive judgment by Supreme Court Decision 2014Du755, supra, on April 10, 201, and the fact that the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive is apparent in the record.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that there was an omission of judgment on the existence of exclusive jurisdiction in the judgment subject to a retrial, and that there were grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9, 1, 2, 10, and 8 of the Civil Procedure Act and grounds for retrial under Article 424 subparag. 6 of the same Act.

First, as to whether there exists a cause for a retrial in the judgment subject to a retrial, it is difficult to view that there is a cause for a retrial as alleged in the judgment subject to a retrial, even if all evidence presented by the Plaintiff were considered.

All other plaintiff's arguments are not limited to the existence of the grounds for retrial as stipulated in Article 451 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

Next, the purport of the remaining request for retrial cannot be allowed under the current law as it goes beyond the revocation and alteration of the judgment subject to retrial.

(3) The Plaintiff’s various applications after the filing of the instant lawsuit are merely the meaning of demanding the ex officio request of this court, and thus does not require any separate decision. In conclusion, the instant lawsuit for retrial is unlawful and thus, it shall be dismissed.