A. The meaning of Article 422(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act

B. The meaning of Article 422(1)8 of the Civil Procedure Act

(a) When the judgment prior to the filing of a new trial referred to in Article 422(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act conflicts with the final and conclusive judgment rendered by the same party means where two final and conclusive judgments conflict with one another with respect to the same case between the same parties;

(b) The term “when a judgment or any other judgment or administrative disposition, which forms the basis for a judgment as referred to in Article 422(1)8 of the Civil Procedure Act, is changed by a different judgment or administrative disposition” means the case where the judgment is cancelled or changed by a later conclusive judgment or administrative disposition;

(a)Article 422(1) of the Civil Procedure Act;

[Judgment of the court below]

Head of North Korean Tax Office

Supreme Court Decision 79Nu430 Delivered on February 26, 1980

The action for retrial shall be dismissed.

The litigation costs for retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff for retrial.

The grounds for retrial of the plaintiff shall be examined.

The term “a case in conflict with a final judgment rendered prior to the judgment to conduct a new trial” under Article 422(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act refers to the case in which two final judgments conflict with one another with respect to the same case between the same parties. As the parties in the case of 80Nu41 and the party members in the case of 79Nu430 cited in the arguments are different, and there is no reason to discuss under the premise that the above 79Nu430 are in conflict with this 80Nu430, and then the term “a case in which a civil or criminal judgment or other administrative disposition, which forms the basis of the judgment, has been changed by a different judgment or administrative disposition” under Article 422(1)8 of the Civil Procedure Act refers to a case in which a new judgment is cancelled or changed by a subsequent final judgment or administrative disposition, not by the change of a judgment based on the above 80Nu430,000, which is the basis of the judgment based on this case’s new judgment.

Therefore, this case's lawsuit is dismissed, and the costs of the retrial are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice)