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 review, are apparent in records or obvious to this court:

On January 26, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the neighboring district court (No. 2017Kadan101292).

On July 13, 2017, the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. On November 30, 2017, the Plaintiff appealed as Suwon District Court 2017Na70632, and the said appellate court rendered a judgment subject to a retrial that dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal.

C. The Plaintiff appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2017Da29024, but the Supreme Court sentenced the dismissal of appeal on March 29, 2018, which became final and conclusive accordingly.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The summary of the argument is unfair to reject each of the statements in Gap evidence No. 21-1 and No. 21-4 submitted by the plaintiff in the judgment subject to a retrial, and it should be accepted and accepted, and the plaintiff's claim shall

Therefore, the judgment subject to review should be revoked.

B. A lawsuit for retrial may be instituted only under the grounds stipulated in Article 451(1)1 through 11 of the Civil Procedure Act. The Plaintiff does not present specific grounds for retrial regarding the judgment subject to retrial, and the above grounds for retrial by the Plaintiff do not constitute any of the grounds for retrial stipulated in the said Article.

In addition, the materials submitted by the Plaintiff alone do not seem to have any grounds for a retrial in the judgment subject to a retrial, and there are no other materials to recognize them.

3. In conclusion, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful because there is no ground for retrial, and it is so decided as per Disposition.