1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

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

On August 19, 2009, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking confirmation of whether the principal claimant’s illegal act was constituted by Suwon District Court Branch 2008Gahap13643, and was sentenced to dismissal judgment as to the claim for confirmation of the principal claimant’s illegal act, and dismissal judgment as to the conjunctive claimant’s claim for damages (hereinafter “the judgment for reexamination”), and the judgment for dismissal as to the preliminary claimant’s claim for damages (hereinafter “the judgment for reexamination”) in combination with the above dismissal judgment.

B. The Plaintiff appealed as Seoul High Court 2009Na87586 only to the judgment subject to a retrial. On April 15, 2011, the appellate court revoked the judgment subject to a retrial and rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim for damages on this part.

C. The Plaintiff filed a petition of appeal on the date of the above judgment of the appellate court, and the presiding judge of the appellate court ordered the appellate court to correct the stamp, etc. based on the appeal within the period for correction. However, the presiding judge of the appellate court ordered the appellate court to dismiss the petition of appeal on June 13, 201 because the Plaintiff did not correct the stamp within the period for correction.

The plaintiff was served on June 15, 201 with the original copy of the dismissal order, but did not file an immediate appeal within the period of time. The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for retrial as to only the part on the claim for confirmation of whether an unlawful act was constituted, as the Suwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch 201.27. The Plaintiff asserted that there were grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)3, 7, and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial. The above court dismissed the part on the Plaintiff’s request for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act as the grounds for retrial on March 26, 2013, and sentenced to a judgment dismissing the remainder of the request for retrial, and the said judgment became final

E. On the other hand, the Plaintiff is the Seoul High Court.