A. According to the purport of the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 1 and the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff received a judgment from this Court (2005da51614) on March 29, 2006 that “the Defendant and C shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 28 million and damages for delay from January 22, 2006,” and the aforementioned judgment became final and conclusive on April 14, 2006, and the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the instant judgment claim.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from January 22, 2006 to September 30, 2015 and 15% per annum from October 1, 2015 to the date of full payment, as requested by the plaintiff, pursuant to the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The defendant's assertion was divorced from C at the time of the judgment of this case, and was subject to the judgment of this case without knowledge of the case due to service by public notice, and there was no obligation to pay the judgment of this case to the plaintiff.

B. (1) The judgment of a new suit is not contrary to the final and conclusive judgment rendered in favor of the previous suit, even in a case where a new suit is allowed based on the same subject matter as the judgment that became final and conclusive exceptionally due to special circumstances, such as interruption of prescription, and thus, the judgment of a new suit does not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment rendered in favor of the previous suit. Thus, the court of the subsequent suit cannot re-examine whether the requirements for claiming the established right have been satisfied. In order for the Defendant to dispute the legal relationship of the previous suit in the subsequent suit, first, the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit should be extinguished by filing a lawful subsequent appeal against the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit. This is the case where the original copy of the previous suit