The litigation of this case shall be dismissed.

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

the purport and purpose of the claim;

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

A. On August 17, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking revocation of the disposition of imposing insurance premiums and arrears as stated in the separate sheet as Seoul Administrative Court 2015 Guhap8961.

On January 21, 2016, the first instance court dismissed the disposition of imposition of late payment charges in the above lawsuit, from April 2008 to May 2010, and from December 2010, from December 2010 to July 2014, and dismissed the Plaintiff’s remaining claims.

B. The Plaintiff dissatisfied with the above judgment and appealed to this court 2016Nu36422. This court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on December 22, 2017 (hereinafter “the judgment subject to a retrial”).

In response to the Plaintiff’s objection to the judgment subject to a retrial, Supreme Court Decision 20182 33043, but the Supreme Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on March 15, 2018.

2. Whether the lawsuit for retrial of this case is legitimate or not, the plaintiff's written confirmation of residence of the Gosiwon without permission (Evidence B No. 1) submitted by the defendant was forged by using a real estate lease agreement under the name of another person, and the details of the defendant's insurance premium calculated by the defendant (Evidence B No. 2 and 3) were also forged by preparing the plaintiff's insurance premium based on the forged confirmation document. Thus, there is a ground for reexamination under Article 451 (1) 6 of the Civil Procedure Act (when documents and other articles used as evidence for the judgment were forged or altered) in the judgment for retrial of this case.

The argument is asserted.

Article 451 (2) of the Civil Procedure Act, which applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 8 (2) of the Administrative Litigation Act, may file a lawsuit for retrial only when a judgment of conviction or judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence has become final and conclusive or a final and conclusive judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence cannot be rendered for reasons other than lack of evidence in cases falling under subparagraphs 4 through 7 of paragraph (1).

"........"

Therefore, Article 451 (1) 4 to 7 of the Civil Procedure Act.