구상금
1. The Defendants jointly and severally against the Plaintiff KRW 42,700,000 and the Defendants from April 24, 2003 to Defendant A. < Amended by Act No. 7940, Apr. 24, 2003>
In the absence of dispute between the parties or according to Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff filed a claim for indemnity against the defendants under Daegu District Court 2006dan27557, the Daegu District Court 2757, and "the defendants jointly and severally, from April 24, 2003 to May 19, 2006 for the defendant A, 5% per annum from February 23, 2006 to the day of complete payment, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment," and the above judgment can be recognized as having become final and conclusive on July 28, 2006 and August 18, 2006. Thus, the defendants are liable to pay the plaintiff the above compensation and delay damages.
As to this, Defendant A was unable to receive the above judgment on the wind that is proceeding by service by public notice, and the above judgment was premised on the premise that Defendant B was trying to drive a vehicle owned by Defendant A and park in the cross-city bus parking lot located in the former North Korean-gun D, which is a pedestrian E and caused the death. At that time, Defendant A already sold the above vehicle to Defendant B, and thus, Defendant A cannot be deemed as a person for service by public notice.
Even in cases where a new suit is allowed based on the same subject matter as a final and conclusive judgment that became final and conclusive exceptionally due to special circumstances, such as a case by examining the case, interruption of prescription, etc., the judgment of a new suit shall not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit. Therefore, the court of the subsequent suit shall not re-examine whether the requirements for claiming the established right
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 can be said to be the defendant's responsibility because the copy of the complaint and the original copy of the judgment in the previous suit were served by service by public notice.