1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

1. The Plaintiff asserts that the judgment subject to a retrial constitutes “when the judgment was omitted with respect to important matters affecting the judgment” under Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Before determining whether there was any ground for retrial as alleged by the Defendant in the judgment subject to retrial, the instant lawsuit for retrial was instituted within the period for filing a retrial, and whether it is legitimate after the party’s judgment became final and conclusive, and then the said period constitutes a peremptory term (Article 456(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). Barring special circumstances, barring special circumstances, the party becomes aware of the existence of the ground for retrial by becoming aware of whether the judgment was omitted at the time when the original copy of the judgment was served (Article 456(2) of the Civil Procedure Act). Thus, where a judgment becomes final and conclusive thereafter, the period for filing a lawsuit for retrial on the ground for evading the said judgment should be calculated from

(See Supreme Court Decision 92Da33930 Decided September 28, 1993). On January 16, 2017, the Plaintiff was served with the original copy of the judgment subject to a retrial and did not file an appeal, and the fact that the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 1, 2017 is apparent in the record.

Therefore, insofar as the Plaintiff did not have any assertion or evidence on a special circumstance that he/she was unaware of the grounds for retrial at the time when he/she was served with the original copy of the judgment subject to retrial, the instant lawsuit brought on November 15, 2017, which was filed on November 15, 2017 after the 30th day of the date on which

In addition, the main purport of the plaintiff's argument is that the judgment of the original judgment was erroneous, and this does not constitute a ground for retrial under Article 451 (1) 9 of the Civil Procedure Act). 2. The conclusion is that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus, it is decided to dismiss it. It is so decided as per Disposition.