logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.11.27 2018재가합24
기타(금전)
Text

1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

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

purport, purport, and.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff, which became final and conclusive in the judgment subject to a retrial, filed a lawsuit against the Defendant to state the purport of the claim in this court. On September 19, 2018, the said court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial that cited the Plaintiff’s claim as it is, and the fact that the judgment subject to a retrial became final and conclusive on October 5, 2018 due to the Defendant’

2. Whether the action for retrial is lawful;

A. On November 1, 2018, an appraiser E of the Defendant’s argument in the judgment subject to a retrial recognized on November 1, 2018 that there was no wastes buried in the instant land, contrary to the content of an appraisal submitted in the execution site of the judgment subject to a retrial, and thus, the judgment subject

B. Determination 1) Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “when a false statement by a witness, expert witness, interpreter, or a false statement by a party or legal representative becomes evidence of a judgment,” a ground for retrial. However, Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “In cases falling under Article 451(1)4 through 7 of the Civil Procedure Act, a lawsuit may be instituted only when a judgment of conviction or a judgment imposing a fine for negligence becomes final and conclusive or a final and conclusive judgment imposing a fine for negligence cannot be rendered for reasons other than lack of evidence.” Therefore, in order to claim a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act, a lawsuit may be instituted without any such ground for retrial, along with a statement that the requirements under Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act have been satisfied. A lawsuit seeking a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act is unlawful without any requirement under Article 451(2) of the Civil Procedure Act, and thus, a retrial need to be dismissed without any ground for retrial under Article 1518(28(2).

arrow