The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

In case where an obligee has seized a provisional attachment against the property owned by the obligor by claiming a part of the claim under provisional attachment as the preserved claim, the interruption of prescription shall take effect only on part of the preserved claim, and it shall not take effect on the remainder of the claim not included in the preserved claim by provisional attachment. Therefore, the court below is justified in holding that the interruption of prescription has effect within the limit of 150,000 won which is preserved by provisional attachment among the damages claims of the Plaintiff as the principal claim by the provisional attachment.

Determination on the ground of appeal No. 2

According to Article 163 of the Civil Act, a claim for interest shall expire if it is not exercised within three years, and a claim for interest accrued therefrom shall not be interpreted as being infected with the same extinctive prescription as an original claim in the completion of the extinctive prescription, as a claim existing independently from an original claim. Therefore, it is justified by the lower court that the part of a claim for interest accrued prior to the filing of the principal lawsuit for which the extinctive prescription expired

The appeal is groundless.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Do-dong Do-won Nababri