The request for retrial is dismissed.

The litigation costs for retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds for request for retrial shall be examined.

First, according to the reasoning for the judgment subject to a retrial, the Plaintiff (Plaintiff)’s grounds of appeal, which asserted that “the interruption of extinctive prescription due to a peremptory notice” cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal, and thus, cannot be a legitimate ground of appeal.

In the judgment subject to a retrial, there are no grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Next, Article 451(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act provides for the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)10 of the same Act to coordinate conflicts between res judicata of the judgment subject to retrial and res judicata of a final and conclusive judgment rendered prior to the final and conclusive judgment, and “when a final and conclusive judgment rendered prior to the final and conclusive judgment is contrary to the final and conclusive

Since the Supreme Court decisions required by the Plaintiff (Plaintiffs) have no effect on the party to the judgment subject to a retrial, there is no room to conflict with the judgment subject to a retrial, it cannot be deemed that there exists a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)10 of the Civil Procedure Act

Therefore, the retrial is dismissed, and the costs of retrial are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.