The litigation of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The following facts, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to review, are clear in records or significant in this court:

On February 13, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant claiming return of unjust enrichment under the Cheongju District Court 2013Gahap1334, but the judgment against the Plaintiff was rendered against the Plaintiff.

B. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed as Daejeon High Court (Cheongju), 2014Na20364, and the above court accepted part of the Plaintiff’s appeal on November 25, 2014, and rendered a judgment that “The part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to pay under the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 673,754,700 won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from July 17, 2013 to November 25, 2014, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.”

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

Accordingly, the Defendant appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2014Da236458, but the said judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on April 9, 2015 as the final judgment of dismissal of an appeal was rendered.

2. Determination as to the existence of a ground for retrial

A. The false statement made by the Defendant’s argument witness L and the false statement made in the examination of the Plaintiff’s representative party to the lawsuit became evidence of the judgment subject to a retrial. This was confirmed in recent related cases. As such, there were grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act in the said judgment

B. Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “In the case of paragraph (1)4 through 7, a suit for retrial may be filed only when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence has become final and conclusive or a final and conclusive judgment of conviction or imposition of a fine for negligence cannot be made for reasons other than lack of evidence”.

Therefore, in order to claim the grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1)4 through 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, the above grounds for retrial have satisfied the requirements under Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act.