All applications for retrial and quasi-deliberation of this case shall be dismissed.

Costs of appeal for retrial and quasi-adjudication shall be assessed.

1. Determination as to the petition for quasi-deliberation of this case

A. The Plaintiff asserted 1) on June 23, 2015, Suwon District Court 2015 or 26, and the part of the order to dismiss the appeal was rejected on June 10, 2015 by the presiding judge’s order to pay the service charges and stamp fees to the Suwon District Court 2015 or 26, but the said court issued an order to dismiss the appeal on June 20, 2015. As such, the above order to quasi-examine 14 was subject to grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act, 2014 or 107 (No. 2014 or 107). The Plaintiff rejected the request to dismiss the above order to dismiss the Defendant’s motion to dismiss the Defendant’s allegation 201 or 107, 2015 or 107, 107, 2015 or 27, 107, 2015.

There is a ground for quasi-deliberation which corresponds to “when a judgment on important matters that may affect the judgment is omitted” under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. In the event that a stamp under the provisions of law is not attached to a petition of appeal as of June 23, 2015 in Suwon District Court 2015Na26 case, Articles 425 and 399 of the Civil Procedure Act are not attached, the presiding judge of the original judgment shall order the appellant to correct the defects within a reasonable period, and the appellant shall not correct the defects within the said period.