대여금
1. The defendant shall pay 25,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from August 20, 2004 to the day of complete payment.
1. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 (including additional number) and the entire pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for a loan claim with the Daegu District Court 2004Kadan9485 (hereinafter "prior lawsuit"), and on October 7, 2004, the above court rendered a judgment that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 25 million won and interest calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from August 20, 2004 to the day of full payment." The above judgment became final and conclusive at that time, and the plaintiff was recognized as having filed an application for the payment order of this case around September 2014 for the extension of the prescription period of the claim based on the prior lawsuit.
2. The defendant's assertion argues that the defendant cannot respond to the plaintiff's claim on the grounds that the plaintiff did not bear an obligation against the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff's claim is not a claim against the defendant.
However, in special circumstances, such as interruption of prescription, even in cases where a new suit based on the same subject matter of lawsuit is allowed exceptionally as a final and conclusive judgment, the judgment of the new suit does not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit. Therefore, the court in the subsequent suit cannot re-examine whether the requirements for claiming the established right are satisfied.
Therefore, in order to dispute the right relationship of the previous suit in the subsequent suit, the Defendant should first file an appeal for a lawful completion of the final judgment in favor of the previous suit and extinguish the res judicata. This does not change on the ground that the service of the copy, original copy, etc. of the previous suit by means of service by public notice was not possible for the Defendant to bring an action against the previous suit due to a cause not attributable to him.
(see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da111340, Apr. 11, 2013). The Defendant did not submit a reply despite being served with a copy of the complaint in the preceding lawsuit, and the judgment without pleading was pronounced, and the judgment is rendered.