1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

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

A. Defendant C’s assertion was punished by a fine of KRW 20 million on August 9, 2013, in Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch case No. 2013 high-risk4557, which was issued by Defendant C with perjury. Since the above summary order became final and conclusive as it is, the judgment subject to a retrial has grounds for retrial pursuant to Article 451(1)5, 7, 8, and 10 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. First, we examine whether there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)5, 8, and 10 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to retrial.

When a person subject to criminal punishment has been led to confession, or obstructed in submitting methods of offence or defense that may affect the judgment, and a judgment of conviction or of a fine for negligence cannot be rendered for any reason other than lack of evidence (Article 451(1)5 and (2) of the Civil Procedure Act), when a final and conclusive judgment of conviction or of a fine for negligence cannot be rendered for any reason other than lack of evidence (Article 451(1)5 and (2) of the Civil Procedure Act), when a judgment of conviction or of a fine for negligence has been altered by any other judgment or administrative disposition (Article 451(1)8 of the Civil Procedure Act), or when a judgment contrary to a final and conclusive judgment rendered prior to the institution of new trial (Article 451(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act) or a judgment

However, it is clear that the Plaintiff’s assertion does not fall under the grounds for appeal. Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the judgment subject to a retrial constitutes Article 451(1)5, 8, and 10 of the Civil Procedure Act is without merit.

Next, we examine whether there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a retrial.

Witness

The false statement by a party or legal representative through the party examination shall be evidence of the judgment, and a judgment of conviction or a judgment of fine for negligence on a witness or party or legal representative who has committed such act shall be convicted for reasons other than lack of evidence.