대여금
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. On February 13, 2008, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant guaranteed the Defendant’s obligation to borrow KRW 250 million against the Plaintiff who is the husband, and sought payment of KRW 40 million as the performance of the above guaranteed obligation to the Defendant.
In this regard, the defendant has already filed a lawsuit against the defendant and C on the same claim that the plaintiff has filed in the lawsuit of this case, but has waived the plaintiff's claim against the defendant in the lawsuit of this case, so that the plaintiff's lawsuit of this case is in conflict with the res judicata effect of the previous lawsuit
2. In full view of the purport of the argument in the statement in Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant on July 16, 2009 against the defendant for the payment of KRW 185 million out of the loan claim No. 300 million against Eul and damages for delay thereof (hereinafter "the lawsuit"). The amount stated in the claim in this case is included in the claim amount of the previous lawsuit, the plaintiff renounced the above claim against the defendant on December 4, 2009, and the record of waiver of such contents was made effective as the final and conclusive judgment. The subject matter of the lawsuit in this case has the same effect as the subject matter of the previous lawsuit, and the subject matter of the lawsuit in this case is identical to the subject matter of the previous lawsuit in this case, and the plaintiff's claim in this case against the defendant in this case cannot be seen as being in conflict with the res judicata effect of the previous lawsuit in this case.
3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.