2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in cases where the other party in the previous suit files a lawsuit against the other party in favor of one party in the previous suit, the subsequent suit shall be deemed unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights. However, in exceptional cases, where it is obvious that the ten-year period of extinctive prescription of the claim based on the final and conclusive judgment has expired, there is benefit

(2) Article 168 of the Civil Act provides that the period of extinctive prescription of a provisional attachment shall continue to exist during the period in which the creditor has exercised his/her right by a provisional attachment. Thus, the interruption of prescription by a provisional attachment shall continue to exist during the period in which the preservation of execution by a provisional attachment continues to exist. In addition, in light of the fact that Article 168 of the Civil Act provides for separate causes for interruption of prescription as to the preserved claim by a provisional attachment, even if a favorable judgment on the merits becomes final and conclusive, the interruption of prescription by a provisional attachment shall not be deemed to have expired since the provisional attachment becomes effective.

(1) In light of the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s provisional attachment of KRW 32,870,00 among the Defendant’s lease deposit claims against Nonparty B by the Seoul District Court 2003Kadan15660 on May 14, 2003 (which appears to have been served on B) and the Plaintiff filed a claim for indemnity payment lawsuit against the Defendant under the above court 2003Kadan207834 on April 25, 2003.