1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant E shall be dismissed.

2. Defendant D shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 49,245,190 as well as to the Plaintiff on June 2007.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer running insurance business, etc., and Defendant D was the owner of F vehicle (hereinafter “instant vehicle”), and Defendant E was the former driver of the instant vehicle.

B. At around 7.05:50 on May 7, 2006, Defendant E had impulsed with G, a pedestrian while driving the instant vehicle in front of the New forest Darsung in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 49,245,190 of the insurance money to G in accordance with the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act in relation to the said accident.

C. The plaintiff filed an application with the defendants for the payment order of the above insurance money as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2008 tea13009. On April 3, 2008, the above court ordered the defendants to pay the defendants the payment order to the effect that "the defendants shall pay to each plaintiff 49,245,190 won with 5% per annum from June 12, 2007 to the service date of the authentic copy of the payment order and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment." The above payment order against the defendant E (hereinafter "previous payment order") was finalized on May 7, 2008.

The above court decided to refer the above payment order to Defendant D for legal proceedings without being served with the original copy of the above payment order to the court of Seoul Central District Court 2008Kadan264849 (hereinafter “the court of first instance”). The court of first instance decided on October 24, 2008 that “Defendant D shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from June 12, 2007 to September 9, 2008, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment” (hereinafter “previous judgment”). The previous judgment became final and conclusive on November 14, 2008.

E. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on August 8, 2018 for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the previous payment order and the previous judgment.

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

2. Defendant E.