1. The plaintiff's petition for retrial is dismissed.

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

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:

As Seoul Western District Court 2005Gahap2981, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking confirmation of invalidity of cause as the commission labor contract of this case was based on an expression of intent by duress. On October 7, 2005, the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. Accordingly, after filing an appeal with the court 2005Na92467, the Plaintiff added the instant commission work contract to the conjunctive claim that the pertinent commission work contract was not duly formed. On September 5, 2006, the court revoked the first instance judgment and rendered a judgment dismissing all of the instant commission work contracts on the grounds that the Plaintiff had already arrived at the retirement age of the Plaintiff under the Rules of Employment dated June 1, 2005, which became effective for the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff’s primary preliminary claim aimed at maintaining the status of labor contract was unlawful on the grounds that there was no benefit of confirmation, and thus,

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Supreme Court Decision 2006Da70035, but the appeal was dismissed on January 11, 2007 due to the mental failure, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on the 22th of the same month.

Since then, on December 19, 201, the Plaintiff filed a request for retrial with the court 2005Na92467 Decided December 19, 201, the Plaintiff was sentenced to dismissal of the above request for retrial on May 9, 2012, and the Plaintiff appealed with the Supreme Court 201Da62028, but the dismissal of the appeal was sentenced on September 13, 2012.

E. In other words, on September 25, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a request for retrial with this court 2005Na92467 Decided September 25, 2012. On November 29, 2012, the judgment dismissing the said request for retrial (hereinafter “the judgment on retrial”) was rendered, and the Plaintiff appealed as Supreme Court Decision 2012Da1096, but the judgment on February 14, 2013 was dismissed.

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

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is either the original judgment or the Seoul High Court.