1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. The following facts are apparent in the records:

On August 21, 2009, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of revocation of dismissal as the Incheon District Court 2009Guhap3501, and at the time, the Defendant was "the vice superintendent of the Incheon Metropolitan City Office of Education acting as the vice superintendent of the Office of Education," and the litigation performer D who was designated by the above Defendant performed the lawsuit.

On April 22, 2010, the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim (hereinafter “previous first instance judgment”).

B. Although the Plaintiff appealed against the previous judgment of the first instance, on July 7, 2011, the judgment dismissing an appeal (Seoul High Court 2010Nu13311; hereinafter “previous appellate judgment”) was rendered, and the Plaintiff appealed again, but the judgment dismissing the appeal was rendered on October 27, 201 (Supreme Court 201Du18564) and the said judgment became final and conclusive.

C. On May 26, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a request for a retrial against the Defendant, claiming the same purport of the claim as stated in the instant claim No. 2.12, which is identical to that of the instant claim. However, the said court rendered a ruling dismissing the lawsuit on December 18, 2014, and the Plaintiff appealed on January 2, 2015, and continues to exist in the appellate court as Seoul High Court No. 2015Nu426.

(2) At the time of the judgment subject to a retrial on the summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion, there is no representative authority or legal representation authority to the “Assistant Superintendent of the Incheon Metropolitan City Office of Education acting as the Defendant,” and the designation of the litigation performer by the above assistant Superintendent of the Office of Education also constitutes a delegation of litigation by a person who does not have the power of attorney. Therefore, there is a ground for retrial under Article 451(1)3

3. Determination on the legitimacy of a lawsuit

A. 1) In the event that an appellate court rendered a judgment on the merits of a case at an appellate trial, the appellate court failed to file a lawsuit for retrial against the judgment of the first instance (Article 451(3) of the Civil Procedure Act, and in such case, the appellate court’s judgment, which is not the appellate court’s judgment