1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff, or Plaintiff for retrial).

1. The following facts are apparent in records:

On August 10, 2004, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the registration of ownership transfer with the purport that “the Defendant shall implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on October 26, 1999 with respect to the instant real estate” with the Gwangju District Court Decision 2004Kadan57910, but was dismissed by the said court on February 17, 2005.

나. 원고는 제1심 판결에 불복하여 광주지방법원 2005나3249호로 항소하였고, 이에 피고도 2005. 3. 21. 원고를 상대로 광주지방법원 2005나3737호로 ‘원고는 피고에게 광주 남구 C 대 681㎡ 중 별지2 하단 도면표시 ㅁ¹, ㅂ¹, ㅅ¹, ㅇ¹, ㅈ¹, ㅊ¹, ㅋ¹, ㅌ¹, ㅁ¹의 각 점을 순차로 연결한 선내 ㉱부분 지상 주택 12.7㎡를 철거하고, 이 사건 부동산을 인도하라’는 내용의 대지인도 등을 구하는 반소를 제기하였다.

C. On December 14, 2005, a party member before the retrial accepted the Plaintiff’s main claim that “the first instance judgment is revoked. The Defendant shall implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration based on the completion of the prescriptive acquisition on October 26, 199 with respect to the instant real estate.” The Defendant dismissed the Defendant’s counterclaim, and rendered a judgment dismissing the Defendant’s counterclaim claim (hereinafter “the subject judgment for retrial”).

On April 14, 2006, the defendant appealed to the Supreme Court Decision 2006Da3264, 2006Da3271 (principal suit). However, the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on April 14, 2006, which became final and conclusive on April 19, 2006.

2. The Defendant’s ground for retrial is that: (a) the judge involved in the judgment subject to retrial led the Plaintiff to make a false statement on behalf of the relevant parties at the time of on-site inspection; (b) voluntarily sent an expert witness to form a written expert testimony, which is a false official document; and (c) made a false statement in forged documents and witness G, H, and D.