beta
Text
1. The request for retrial of this case is dismissed.
2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.
purport, purport, ..
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that “The Defendant’s compensation for delay on the unpaid rent was reduced to KRW 90,000,000, without reasonable grounds, is arbitrary and unreasonable.” The Plaintiff asserted that the judgment subject to a retrial is contrary to Supreme Court Decision 90Da14478 Decided March 27, 1991, and is unreasonable.” Since the judgment subject to a retrial did not make any judgment thereon, there were grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. On the other hand, the judgment subject to a retrial asserts that "the plaintiff has a ground for retrial under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Busan District Court Decision 2012Na12259 and the Supreme Court Decision 201Na193 Decided March 27, 1991," which stated that "the plaintiff has a ground for retrial under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Busan District Court Decision 2012Na12259 and the Supreme Court Decision 2012Na193 Decided March 27, 1991," which stated that "the plaintiff has a ground for retrial under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Decision 2012Na193, Busan District Court Decision 2012Na193."
2.(b)
2) In the judgment of final appeal against the Busan District Court Decision 2012Na193, the Plaintiff’s assertion that “The ground for final appeal against the Busan District Court Decision is apparent in its record that it cannot be a legitimate ground for final appeal in violation of the proviso of Article 451(1) of the Civil Procedure Act.” Therefore, it cannot be deemed that there is a ground for final appeal under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to final appeal. (B) The Plaintiff’s assertion that reducing damages for delay against the Defendant’s unpaid rent amounting to KRW 90,000 does not constitute an arbitrary judgment without reasonable ground for final appeal, not that there was such error in the judgment subject to final appeal, but that there was an error in the judgment of final appeal in the judgment of final appeal and the judgment of Busan District Court 2012Na12259
3. Conclusion, the petition for retrial of this case is filed.