양수금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
In full view of the evidence evidence Nos. 2, 3, and 5 as to the cause of the claim, the bankruptcy trustee of the Dongan Bank Co., Ltd., the bankrupt bank filed a lawsuit against the defendant on Dec. 4, 2003 against the Seoul District Court Decision 2003Da241162, and sentenced the above court to "the defendant paid KRW 70,200,000 jointly and severally with the Orra New Factor," and the above judgment became final and conclusive on Dec. 28, 2003; the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation transferred the claim based on the above final and conclusive judgment to the plaintiff on Jul. 27, 2004 and notified the defendant thereof on Nov. 4, 2004; and the plaintiff filed the lawsuit against the defendant on Nov. 5, 2013 after the expiration of the extinctive prescription period of the claim based on the final and conclusive judgment.
According to the above facts, since the lawsuit in this case was filed for the interruption of extinctive prescription of claims based on the final judgment, there exists a benefit in the lawsuit. The defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 6 million won among the claims based on the above final judgment and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from November 21, 2013 to the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint in this case, which is the day of complete payment.
The defendant's assertion asserts that, prior to the filing of a prior suit, the debt owed to the Dongro New Factor Corporation, which was the basis of the above final judgment, has become extinct due to the completion of extinctive prescription.
Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in principle, the parties cannot file a new suit based on the same subject matter of lawsuit as the final and conclusive judgment, and in exceptional cases where there are special circumstances, such as interruption of prescription, a new suit shall be exceptionally allowed. In such a case, the judgment in favor of the new suit shall not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit. Thus, the