1. The request for retrial of this case is dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, ..

1. According to the final records of the judgment subject to a retrial, the following facts are recognized:

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the confirmation of the authenticity of the deed with the Seocho District Court Branch Branching 2015Kadan924 (hereinafter “the first instance court judgment”), and the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s lawsuit on May 12, 2015 on the ground that “the instant confirmation document cannot be deemed as “documents proving legal relations,” and the confirmation of the authenticity of the said confirmation document alone cannot be deemed as the “documents proving legal relations,” and it is difficult to view the Plaintiff’s dispute itself as being resolved or as being significantly helpful for the resolution of the dispute.”

B. In response to the judgment of the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with the Gangnam District Court 2015Na1007 (hereinafter “the judgment on retrial”), but the said court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on the same ground as the judgment of the first instance court on October 6, 2015.

C. On February 3, 2016, the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing a final appeal on February 3, 2016, which became final and conclusive by serving the Plaintiff on February 11, 2016.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that there was a ground for retrial falling under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act, “when the judgment subject to a retrial was omitted on important matters affecting the judgment,” since the Defendant omitted the judgment on this part, even though he forged the instant confirmation document.”

In the case of determining a case on the ground that there is no defect in the litigation requirements, the court shall automatically affect the conclusion of the judgment by means of attack and defense which the parties have lawfully submitted in the lawsuit in case of determining a case on the ground of the lack of the litigation requirements.