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 are apparent in records: (a) the determination of the original judgment is final and conclusive.

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant as Busan District Court 2005Kadan11028, and on July 26, 2007, the above court rendered a judgment that partly accepted the plaintiff's claim and dismissed the remaining claims (hereinafter "the first instance judgment").

B. The Plaintiff appealed as Busan District Court 2007Na11757, which was dissatisfied with the judgment of the first instance court, but the above court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal on January 11, 2008 (hereinafter “the judgment on review”).

The plaintiff appealed against the judgment of the appellate court, but on April 14, 2008, the above appeal was dismissed by Supreme Court Decision 2008Da12583, which became final and conclusive.

C. On June 23, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for retrial of this case against the judgment subject to a retrial.

2. A witness D’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion made a false statement contrary to memory even though “around June 3, 200, he borrowed KRW 13 million from the Plaintiff” in a lawsuit subject to review. Since the judgment subject to review was based on such false statement, there exist grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)7 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. A lawsuit for retrial shall be filed within 30 days from the date the relevant party becomes aware of the grounds for retrial after the judgment becomes final and conclusive (Article 456 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act), and where the grounds for retrial have arisen after the final and conclusive judgment becomes final and conclusive, a lawsuit for retrial shall not be

(Article 456(4) and (3) of the Civil Procedure Act (Article 456(4) and (4) of A’s No. 2-1 to 4, the Busan District Court made a false statement contrary to memory even though D’ on June 8, 2010 in a lawsuit subject to review, even though it borrowed KRW 13 million from the Plaintiff on June 3, 200 in a lawsuit subject to review.

‘The Court sentenced D' to D for a six-month punishment due to the summary of the crime (Seoul District Court 2010Ma873), and D and the Prosecutor appealed against the above judgment, but all appeals on November 4, 2010 are filed.