1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in cases where a party who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party files a lawsuit again against the other party to the lawsuit identical to the previous judgment in favor of one party, the subsequent lawsuit is unlawful

However, in exceptional cases, if it is obvious that the ten-year period, which is the period of extinctive prescription of a claim based on a final judgment, has expired, the lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription has benefit

(See Supreme Court Decision 2005Da74764 delivered on April 14, 2006). According to the health class, Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant against the defendant against the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2004Da33063 delivered on April 20, 1996 and filed a lawsuit against the defendant to claim a loan claim as of April 20, 2005, and "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 41,171,590 won and money calculated at the rate of 22% per annum from December 24, 2003 to the day of full payment." The above judgment became final and conclusive on February 8, 2005 is significant in this court.

On May 8, 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit claiming a loan claim as of April 20, 1996. The instant lawsuit constitutes a case where the Plaintiff, who is subject to res judicata of the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, files a lawsuit for the same claim as the previous suit against the Defendant, who is the other party to the said final and conclusive judgment, and there was no benefit in the protection of rights, since ten years have passed since the said judgment became final and conclusive.

Therefore, the instant lawsuit is dismissed as it is unlawful.