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 following facts of basic facts are apparent in, or obvious to, this Court:
The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the payment of KRW 73,60,000,00 in aggregate of lease deposit and damages for delay, as a public order order branch of the Daejeon District Court 201Gadan114, but the said court rendered a judgment citing only KRW 25,00,000 in the Plaintiff’s claim on August 18, 201 and the damages for delay.
B. Of the above judgment, the Plaintiff appealed to the part against the Plaintiff and filed an appeal with Daejeon District Court 201Na15979. However, on March 22, 2012, the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal. The Plaintiff again appealed to the above judgment and appealed to Supreme Court 2012Da33969. However, the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on June 14, 2012.
C. After that, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for a retrial against the judgment of Daejeon District Court 201Na200, Daejeon District Court 2011Na15979, but the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the lawsuit for a claim expanded in the litigation for a retrial on November 13, 2012 and dismissing the petition for retrial. Accordingly, the Plaintiff appealed with the Supreme Court 201Da11323, but the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on March 6, 2013.
In addition, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for a retrial against the judgment of Daejeon District Court 2013Na30, Daejeon District Court 2012Na200, but the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the lawsuit for the part of the claim expanded in the litigation for a retrial on August 14, 2013 and dismissing the request for retrial (hereinafter “the judgment for retrial”), and the Plaintiff appealed as Supreme Court Decision 2013Da68436 Decided November 28, 2013, but the said judgment became final and conclusive on the same day by a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on November 28, 2013.
2. Whether the litigation for retrial of this case is legitimate or not, prior to the judgment on the Plaintiff’s grounds for retrial, whether the litigation for retrial of this case is legitimate or not.