1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, ..

1. The following facts, which have become final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, are apparent or apparent in records in this court:

In around 1994, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the payment of the loan, alleging that the Plaintiff did not receive the loan from the Defendant under the Busan District Court Decision 94Ga6052.

On February 17, 1995, the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the plaintiff's claim (hereinafter "the court of first instance").

B. The plaintiff appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance as Busan District Court 95Na3692, but the above appellate court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on September 28, 1995 (hereinafter "the judgment dismissing the appeal").

C. The Plaintiff appealed against the judgment subject to a retrial by Supreme Court Decision 95Da47565, but the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the final appeal on January 23, 1996, which became final and conclusive on February 9, 1996.

On December 26, 2018, the Plaintiff appealed to the judgment subject to a retrial and filed a lawsuit for retrial of this case.

2. The Defendant, on the ground of the review of the Plaintiff’s assertion, made a false statement contrary to memory in the court even though he did not have deposited as a repayment of loan on behalf of the Plaintiff, and C also made a false statement constituting perjury.

The judgment subject to review rejected the Plaintiff’s claim based on such false statement.

The plaintiff still does not receive money from the defendant, thus filing a petition for review.

3. Article 456(3) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “No lawsuit for retrial shall be instituted upon the lapse of five years after the judgment became final and conclusive.”

According to the records, the judgment subject to a retrial becomes final and conclusive on February 9, 1996, and the lawsuit of this case was filed on December 26, 2018.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful since it was filed after the lapse of five-year period for filing a lawsuit stipulated in Article 456(3) of the Civil Procedure Act.

4. Conclusion.