A. On June 16, 2011, this Court rendered a judgment accepting the Plaintiff’s claim on June 16, 2011 (the Defendant, jointly and severally with C Co., Ltd., to pay KRW 30 million and delayed damages therefrom), which became final and conclusive on July 23, 201.

B. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit to suspend the statute of limitations on the claim based on the above judgment.

[Evidence] Evidence No. 1, a significant fact in this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case for the interruption of the statute of limitations on the claim based on the above judgment, and there is a benefit to seek confirmation on the lawsuit, and the plaintiff's claim in this case is reasonable.

B. The Defendant repaid KRW 10 million to the Plaintiff and performed the above claim by giving three points of curios to the Plaintiff.

The argument is asserted.

On the other hand, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of a lawsuit for the interruption of prescription for the interruption of claim extinction based on the above judgment. Thus, the defendant's assertion of performance cannot be a defense against the plaintiff's claim.

However, if the repayment of part of the claim is close to the filing date of the lawsuit in this case after the date of the final judgment above, it may be a matter of interest in the confirmation of the lawsuit in this case. However, the defendant's own decision did not specify the time of repayment, and the plaintiff's assertion was asserted at the time of the lawsuit in this case. Thus, the defendant's argument is groundless.

3. Conclusion Claim of the Plaintiff