1. The defendant shall pay 50,600,000 won to the plaintiff and 5% per annum from February 17, 1998 to September 25, 2004.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant and Eul (U.S. District Court Decision 2004Da45390, Oct. 26, 2004) claiming for reimbursement of the above compensation amount against the defendant and Eul (U.S. District Court Decision 2004Da45390, Oct. 26, 2004). The plaintiff's judgment against the defendant and Eul was rendered on Oct. 26, 2004 with respect to "50,600,000 won with respect to the defendant and Eul and the plaintiff jointly and severally and severally with the plaintiff and with respect to the defendant and the plaintiff for reimbursement of the compensation amount from Feb. 25, 1998 to Feb. 204, 2004, each of the above judgment of 194Da453904, Oct. 26, 2004.

In special circumstances, such as interruption of prescription, even in cases where a new suit based on the same subject matter of lawsuit is allowed exceptionally as a final and conclusive judgment, the judgment of the new suit does not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit. Therefore, the court in the subsequent suit cannot re-examine whether the requirements to assert the established right are satisfied or not.

(2) The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 50,600,000 won and the amount calculated by applying the rate of 50% per annum from February 17, 1998 to September 25, 2004, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment, upon the Plaintiff’s claim seeking the interruption of prescription pursuant to the foregoing final judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da11340, Apr. 11, 2013). Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is justified.