On April 1, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant C (hereinafter “D”) on the lease of the bath part of the fifth floor among the E-ground buildings in Busan Dong-gu with deposit money of KRW 45 million, monthly rent of KRW 600,000, and two years (hereinafter “instant lease contract”).

B. After that, Defendant B, a manager of D, jointly and severally guaranteed the instant lease agreement by Defendant C, a private individual of the Defendant B, and the Plaintiff agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement at D’s request on July 2006 and delivered the instant bath to D, but did not receive the refund of the deposit amount of KRW 45 million. However, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking the return of the said deposit with the Busan District Court Decision 2007Da16638, Jun. 13, 2007 with respect to the Defendants and D, on the grounds that “The Defendant and D jointly and severally agreed to pay KRW 45 million and its amount at the rate of 20% per annum from March 24, 2007 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “previous judgment”).

2. If the subject matter of a lawsuit is identical with that of the plaintiff's claim, the court of the subsequent lawsuit cannot render a judgment inconsistent with that of the previous lawsuit, because the res judicata effect of the judgment in the previous lawsuit is in the subsequent lawsuit.

According to the above facts, the subject matter of the previous judgment is identical to that of the previous judgment, and the res judicata of the previous judgment is not in this case. Thus, the defendants are jointly and severally serving a copy of the complaint of this case sought by the plaintiff from March 24, 2007 to the plaintiff from March 24, 2007, unless there are special circumstances.