양수금
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant A Co., Ltd, B, and C shall be jointly and severally and severally with Defendant D, E, and F, KRW 100,000,000, and this shall apply thereto. < Amended by Act No. 5995, Dec. 1
1. The facts of recognition are as shown in the attached Form “Grounds for Application”.
[Ground of recognition] The elements of evidence Nos. 1 and 2 between the Plaintiff, Defendant A corporation, and Defendant B, and between the Plaintiff, Defendant C, D, E, and F, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are obligated to pay to the plaintiff the same amount as that set forth in paragraph (1) of this Article.
As to this, Defendant C asserts to the effect that since G obtained a loan from the Gyeonggi Bank Co., Ltd. and affixed it as a joint and several surety without obtaining its permission, Defendant C is not liable for the loan obligations.
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
(1) As seen earlier, the instant case is a new suit instituted for the interruption of extinctive prescription of a claim based on the first judgment demanding Defendant C to pay the remainder of the principal and interest of the instant loan obligation. As such, the instant case cannot re-examine whether all the requirements of the instant claim are satisfied according to the res judicata of the first judgment that became final and conclusive, i.e., whether to forge a loan contract asserted by Defendant C, and thus, the instant assertion by Defendant C is groundless without having to further examine.
On the other hand, there is no evidence to acknowledge the above facts of defendant C. 3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case against the defendants is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.