1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The Defendant, who became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff for retrial under this Court Decision 2008Na61075 Decided January 14, 2009, which was subject to a retrial under this Court Order 2009Na679. However, this Court rendered a judgment on January 29, 2010 that “the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed,” and the facts that became final and conclusive around that time are apparent in the record.

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

A. First, the defendant asserts that there are grounds for a retrial under Article 451(1)4 and 10 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a retrial, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it, without merit.

B. Next, the defendant dismissed the lawsuit for retrial on the basis that the defendant's certificate of personal seal impression (issuance number) dated May 4, 1995, which was the evidence of the above 2008Na61705 decision, was a document that was duly formed. Since the above documents were forged, the judgment for retrial contains grounds for retrial under Article 451 (1) 6 of the Civil Procedure Act. However, although the above certificate of personal seal impression was not proven as evidence of the judgment for retrial, there is no evidence that the above document was forged or altered, and there is no evidence that the judgment for conviction or the judgment for imposition of a fine for negligence became final and conclusive, the defendant's above assertion is without merit

3. If so, the lawsuit of this case is inappropriate because it does not meet the requirements under Article 451 of the Civil Procedure Act, and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.