The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 62,539,403 and shall pay to the plaintiff the full amount from August 27, 2004.

A. Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, where the party against whom the final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party in favor of one party in a lawsuit again files a claim identical to the previous suit in favor of the other party in the previous suit, the subsequent suit is inappropriate as there is no benefit of protection of rights, but exceptionally, where it is obvious that the ten-year period of extinctive prescription of the claim based on the final and conclusive

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da74764 Decided April 14, 2006. Meanwhile, the interruption of prescription by provisional seizure continues while the effect of preserving the execution of provisional seizure remains effective (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Da18622, Nov. 14, 2013). There is no reason to regard the effect of interruption of prescription by provisional seizure as different from that of provisional seizure.

Therefore, the interruption of prescription due to attachment shall continue until the attachment procedure is completed, and the prescription period shall continue anew from the time when the cause of interruption ceases to exist.

B. On October 6, 2003, the defendant applied for a payment order against the defendant to the Seoul Southern District Court 2003 tea 20578 with respect to the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case, and on October 6, 2003, "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 76,615,660 won per annum from July 26, 2003 to the service date of the application for payment order, 5% per annum, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment (hereinafter "the payment order of this case") to the defendant on May 26, 2004. The payment order of this case ("the payment order of this case") was delivered to the defendant on June 10, 204; the plaintiff applied for the collection order of this case to the Seoul Southern District Court 204.36% of the amount corresponding to the defendant's wage claim 204.27.24% and 204.274% of the Seoul Southern District Court.