2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

A. On April 25, 2001, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for a loan claim against the Incheon District Court 2001Gaso82036.

(2) On October 101, 2001, the judgment of the court of the previous suit of this case (hereinafter “the previous suit of this case”) rendered a favorable judgment against the plaintiff that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 9.4 million won and the amount calculated at the rate of 25% per annum from September 23, 2001 to the date of full payment," and the original copy of the judgment was sent by service, and the judgment of the previous suit of this case became final and conclusive on November 6, 201.

B. On September 9, 2011, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the claim based on the judgment on the instant prior suit (hereinafter “instant claim”). The court of first instance also rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff after having proceeded with the litigation by public notice, and the judgment of the court of first instance became final and conclusive on January 28, 2012.

C. On June 3, 2016, the Plaintiff’s judgment of the first instance court was the executive title and seized movable property owned by the Defendant, and the Defendant became aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance court and the judgment of the first instance court of this case was served by public notice.

On June 10, 2016, the Defendant asserted that no money was borrowed from the Plaintiff, and filed an appeal to the first instance court’s decision.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, significant facts in this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In special circumstances, such as interruption of prescription, where a new suit based on the same subject matter of a lawsuit is allowed exceptionally, the judgment of a 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.

Therefore, the defendant asserts the right relationship of the previous suit in the subsequent suit.