The request for retrial is dismissed.

The litigation costs for retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

The grounds for request for retrial shall be examined.

The gist of the grounds for retrial asserted by the plaintiff (the plaintiff) is that the decision for retrial that led to a delegation of litigation by a person who is not authorized to represent the defendant constitutes grounds for retrial under Article 451 (1) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The purport of the Civil Procedure Act stipulating the defect of the authority of legal representation, etc. as grounds for retrial is to protect the party’s side where such authority of representation is defective. Thus, the other party should be entitled to benefit by asserting such grounds for retrial.

Here, the case where benefits can be obtained refers to the case where the previous judgment can be finally changed to the other party’s interest even for reasons other than the defect of power of representation as above (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da513, Dec. 22, 2000). However, there is no evidence to acknowledge such a case in this case.

Therefore, the retrial of this case is dismissed, and the costs of the retrial are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.