임금
1. The Defendant’s annual interest in KRW 52,00,459 and KRW 15,744,262 from December 21, 2013 to September 30, 2015 to the Plaintiff.
1. In full view of the purport of Gap evidence No. 1 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for wage payment (this Court 2007Gahap1657), and on May 22, 2008, "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 29,245,30 won and interest calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from March 15, 2007 to December 17, 2007, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment" (hereinafter "the judgment of this case"). The judgment of this case can be acknowledged as having become final and conclusive on June 14, 2008, for the interruption of the prescription period of the claim under the preceding judgment of this case, the plaintiff shall not be subject to dispute over the principal amount of the judgment of this case between 10,245,330 won and the parties 205,2015.
According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 29,245,30 won with 5% per annum from March 15, 2007 to December 17, 2007, and 20% per annum from the next day to December 20, 2013, the sum of 36,288,246 won and 15,74,262 won with 52,00,459 won and 15,74,262 won with 20% interest per annum from the next day to December 20, 207, and 36,288,246 won with 15,74,50 won with 52,00,500 won with 52,74,262 won with 20% interest per annum from September 21, 2013 to September 30, 2015.
2. Although the defendant's assertion is disputed to the effect that there is no obligation to pay damages for delay, the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the defendant has res judicata effect, the parties cannot file a new suit on the basis of the same subject matter of lawsuit as the final and conclusive judgment in principle or in exceptional circumstances such as the interruption of prescription.