1. Of the lawsuits for retrial of this case, the part concerning the grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be dismissed.

2...

1. Determination of the original judgment

A. On December 21, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the payment of damages against this court’s 2016Gadan22643, and the said court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim.

B. On October 25, 2018, the Plaintiff filed an appeal with this Court No. 2018Na30694, but the above court rendered a ruling dismissing the Plaintiff’s appeal (hereinafter “the judgment on review”) and the said judgment on review became final and conclusive as it did not file an appeal.

2. Determination as to the existence of a ground for retrial

A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion was that the Plaintiff did not perform an operation on the upper left side of the second half alley of the second half alley of the upper left side of the Plaintiff, and some of the first half alleys of the left side of the lower left side of the second half alley of the lower left side of the Plaintiff.

The defendant, who intends to conceal these facts, submitted at will the evidence that he arbitrarily fabricated (EXE video material) to the court that is subject to a retrial.

The Plaintiff became aware of the circumstances submitted as a result of the judgment subject to a retrial.

Therefore, there are grounds for retrial under Article 451(1)6 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Act in the judgment subject to a retrial.

B. Determination 1) Article 451(1)9 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “When a judgment is omitted on a material fact that may affect the judgment,” the term “when a judgment is omitted on a material fact that is alleged by a party in a lawsuit,” refers to the case where a judgment is not clearly indicated in the reasoning of the judgment regarding the fact that has an impact on the judgment among the means of attack and defense alleged by the party in a lawsuit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da69834, 69841, Nov. 27, 2008). The Plaintiff’s assertion itself is obvious that “the Plaintiff does not have been subject to the judgment of the court because it does not have any evidence submitted by the Defendant during the lawsuit pending in the judgment subject to a retrial,” and therefore, Article 451(1)6 of the Civil Procedure Act cannot be deemed to have been omitted in the judgment subject to a