대여금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
3.Paragraph 1 of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance.
1. On March 27, 2003, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for a loan claim (the District Court Decision 2003Gada12131), and the Plaintiff was served on September 17, 2003 by means of service such as a duplicate of the complaint and notice of the date of pleading, etc., and on October 1, 2003, the Plaintiff winning the lawsuit (hereinafter “the previous lawsuit in this case”) stating that “the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 1,90,000 and the interest calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from May 11, 2003 to the date of full payment,” and the original copy of the judgment was served on the Defendant by means of service by public notice, and the fact that the judgment became final and conclusive on October 24, 2003 does not conflict between the parties, or is significant in this court.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit in this case for the interruption of extinctive prescription against the claim based on the judgment on the prior suit in this case, and that the defendant did not borrow the loan that the plaintiff sought from the plaintiff in the judgment on the prior suit in this case.
B. In special circumstances, such as interruption of extinctive prescription, where a new suit based on the same subject matter of a lawsuit is allowed exceptionally, the judgment of the new suit does not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment rendered in favor of the previous suit. Therefore, the court of the subsequent suit cannot re-examine whether the requirements for claiming the established right are satisfied or not.
(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da1645 delivered on June 12, 1998, etc.). Therefore, in order for the Defendant to dispute the final legal relationship of the previous suit in the subsequent suit, the res judicata should be extinguished by filing an appeal for a lawful completion of the final judgment in favor of the previous suit. This does not change on the following grounds: (a) a copy, original copy, etc. of the previous suit was served by service by public notice, and thus, the Defendant could not have responded to the previous suit due to a cause not attributable to the Defendant.
(See Supreme Court Decision 2012Da111340 Decided April 11, 2013).