양수금
1. The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed;
2...
1. The Plaintiff sought against the Defendant for the payment of each of the claims that he/she acquired from the Bank, New Card Co., Ltd., Credit Card Co., Ltd., Credit Card Co., Ltd., and Teyman Loan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Tyman”). The court of first instance dismissed the claim for the part that he/she acquired from Tyman and accepted the remainder of the claim.
Since only the plaintiff appeals against this issue, the subject of this Court's adjudication is limited to the part of the claim that the plaintiff acquired from Teyn, the part against which the plaintiff lost.
2. Whether the part of the claim that he/she acquired from Telecommunication money is legitimate;
A. Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, where a party who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party files a lawsuit against the other party to the previous suit identical to that in the previous suit in favor of one party to the previous suit, the subsequent suit shall be deemed unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights. However, where it is obvious that the ten-year period of extinctive prescription of a claim based on a final and conclusive judgment has expired, there is a benefit in the lawsuit for interruption of prescription (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006; 98Da1645, Jun. 12, 1998). Therefore, the final and conclusive judgment not only becomes effective for the party but also for the successor after the closure of pleadings (see, e.g., Article 218(1) of the Civil Procedure Act).
B. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence Nos. 3, 5, and 5, E. 2-2-3, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the lower court sentenced the Defendant to the judgment that “the Defendant shall pay to E.I.D. 6,376,638 won and the amount of KRW 2,758,241 per annum from December 12, 2012 to the date of full payment,” and sentenced the Defendant to the judgment that “the Defendant shall pay to E.S. 6,376,638 won and the amount of KRW 2,758,241 in return,” and the said judgment becomes final and conclusive as of January 17, 2013; the Plaintiff from E.S. Ba.