양수금
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.
Where a party who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party institutes a lawsuit again against the other party to the lawsuit identical to the previous suit in favor of a final and conclusive judgment, the subsequent suit is unlawful because there is no benefit in the protection of rights, and it is obvious that the ten-year period of extinctive prescription of a claim based on a final and conclusive judgment has expired, there is benefit in the lawsuit
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Meu1761, Nov. 10, 1987; 2005Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006). Moreover, a final and conclusive payment order has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment (see, e.g., Article 474 of the Civil Procedure Act). Since a final and conclusive judgment has its effect on a successor subsequent to the closure of pleadings (see, e.g., Article 218(1) of the Civil Procedure Act), a person who succeeds to the legal relationship of a subject matter of a lawsuit after the closing of pleadings or the final and conclusive order for payment becomes final and conclusive
However, according to the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, ① A applied for a payment order against the Defendant as the Daegu District Court 2002 tea13771 and the Defendant received the payment order from the court on June 20, 2002 from B to pay KRW 41 million and damages for delay from September 14, 2002 (hereinafter “instant payment order”) and confirmed as of September 28, 2002, ② B received reimbursement of KRW 550,000 from the Defendant on November 1, 201, and KRW 400,000 from February 2, 2014; ③ thereafter, B transferred the above loan claims to the Plaintiff on November 21, 2016, and the Defendant was notified on November 21, 2016, and ④ thereafter, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Defendant 1 who acquired the loan claims against each of the Defendant on December 1, 2016.
According to the above facts, the plaintiff is a successor to the loan bond under the relevant payment order after the payment order of this case became final and conclusive.