beta
Text
1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, ..
Reasons
1. The plaintiff in the judgment subject to a retrial filed a lawsuit against the defendant as Jeonju District Court Branch Branching 99Gahap682, but the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the plaintiff's claim on April 26, 2000, and the plaintiff appealed as 200Na2268 of Gwangju High Court, but the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the plaintiff's appeal on May 24, 2002 (hereinafter "the judgment subject to a retrial"). The plaintiff appealed as Supreme Court Decision 2002Da33878 Decided August 2, 200, but the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the plaintiff's appeal on August 2, 2002, and it is evident that the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive as is on the same day.
2. Determination on the lawfulness of the litigation for retrial of this case
A. The plaintiff's assertion and the key issue are that the judgment subject to a retrial adopted Eul's testimony as evidence of evidence of evidence Nos. 4 (a mid-term lease contract) and witness D of the first instance court, but Eul evidence No. 4 was altered by the J. Since D's testimony was false, there are grounds for retrial under Article 451 (1) 5, 6, 7, and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a retrial, and among them, the prosecutor belonging to the office of the branch office of the previous district public prosecutor's office in the previous district public prosecutor's office in the case No. 93, 94, 95 of the appeal No. 2005 on the ground that the statute of limitations has expired for the suspected facts, such as the fabrication of private documents by J, etc. (the alteration). This asserts that the judgment constitutes "when a final judgment of conviction or a final judgment of fine for negligence cannot be rendered due to reasons other than lack of evidence" under Article 451 (2)
Therefore, the key issue of the instant case is whether the instant lawsuit is legitimate, and whether the grounds for retrial of the Plaintiff’s assertion are recognized.
B. (1) Determination as to the legitimacy of the litigation for the retrial of this case (1) The evidence No. 4, which the plaintiff employed as evidence by this court 2002Na103 on December 10, 2002, was altered, and the witness D of the first instance court.