1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

1. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and C for a loan claim as the Daejeon District Court 2016Kadan11001, Daejeon District Court 201, and the Daejeon District Court rendered a judgment against the Defendant on February 6, 2017 that “the Defendant shall jointly and severally pay KRW 100 million and any delay damages therefrom” against the Defendant, and the Defendant appealed as the Daejeon District Court 2017Na2111, but the Daejeon District Court rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s appeal on April 25, 2018 (hereinafter “the judgment subject to review”), and the Defendant appealed as the Supreme Court 2018Da25564, but the fact that the judgment dismissing the Defendant’s appeal on July 23, 2018 is obvious.

2. Determination on the legitimacy of the litigation for retrial of this case

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff, on the documents, led to deceptioning, manipulating, forging, or perjury all the evidence on the documents in a case subject to review.

The judgment subject to review shall be revoked following the judgment based on forged evidence by the Plaintiff.

B. Article 451(1)5 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “When a person makes a confession, or interferes with submission of a means of offence or defense that may affect the judgment, due to an act committed by another person subject to criminal punishment,” subparagraph 6 of the same Article provides that “when the document or any other article used as evidence of the judgment has been forged or altered,” and subparagraph 7 of the same Article provides that “when the false statement by a witness, expert witness, or interpreter, or the false statement by a party or legal representative by the party’s examination, becomes evidence of the judgment,”

The grounds for retrial under Article 5(2) of the same Act may be instituted only when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence becomes final for an act subject to punishment, or when a final judgment of conviction or a final judgment of imposition of a fine for negligence is impossible for reasons other than lack of evidence.

The term "" is defined as ".

The grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)5, 6, and 7 of the Civil Procedure Act are as follows.