(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.05.27 2014재나49

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.05.27 2014재나49

대여금

Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, ..

Reasons

1. The following facts, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are remarkable in this court or are not disputed between the parties.

On February 14, 2006, in the judgment of Jeonju District Court 2006Gau18088, which was the first instance court of the case brought by the Plaintiff against the Defendant, the judgment that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 5.3 million won and the amount equivalent to 20% per annum from March 9, 2006 to the date of full payment.” The original of the judgment was served by public notice to the Defendant.

B. After that, the Defendant filed a subsequent appeal with the court of first instance on January 10, 2014, but the Defendant’s appeal was filed with the court of first instance prior to the competent District Court 2014Na447, which was the appellate court, and the judgment dismissing the appeal on July 24, 2014 on the ground that it was unlawful, since the Defendant’s appeal was filed with the lapse of the period of subsequent appeal, and the judgment of first instance became final and conclusive as it is because the Defendant did not file an appeal.

2. Grounds for retrial and determination

A. Since the Defendant’s false statement of the Plaintiff’s grounds for retrial was a evidence of the judgment subject to retrial, this constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that "when the false statement by a witness, an expert witness, or an interpreter or a false statement by a party or legal representative has become evidence of a judgment, the grounds for retrial may be brought pursuant to Article 451(1)7 of the said Act." Article 451(2) of the said Act provides that "when a judgment of conviction or a judgment of a fine for negligence has become final and conclusive as to the act subject to punishment in cases falling under subparagraphs 4 through 7 of paragraph (1), or when a final and conclusive judgment of conviction or a final and conclusive judgment of a fine for negligence cannot be rendered for reasons other than lack of evidence, a lawsuit for retrial may be brought pursuant to Article 451(1)7 of the said Act." Thus, if the requirements under

참조조문

-민사소송법 제451조 제1항 제7호

-민사소송법 제451조 제2항

유사 판례

-청주지방법원 2014.12.11 2014재나61

-수원지방법원 2018.10.31 2017재나136

-대법원 2015.05.14 2015재두122

-청주지방법원 제천지원 2018.02.21 2017재가단12

-창원지방법원 2015.08.20 2015재나16