1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff ordering payment shall be revoked.

2. The defendant on 7,026.

1. Basic facts

A. On October 19, 2005, the Promotion Mutual Savings Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Promotion Mutual Savings Bank”) received a judgment stating that “the Defendant shall pay to the Promotion Mutual Savings Bank 4,962,729 won and 2,293,421 won, calculated at the rate of 28% per annum from February 4, 2005 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “prior judgment”), and the preceding judgment became final and conclusive on November 26, 2005.

B. Promotional mutual savings banks, on January 11, 2006, received reimbursement of KRW 43,760 among the prior judgment claims from the Defendant and appropriated it to the principal. The remaining principal amount as of May 13, 201 as of May 13, 201 is KRW 2,249,661 (=2,293,421 - 43,760), and the accrued interest amount is KRW 4,76,408.

C. On June 15, 2011, the promoting mutual savings bank transferred the remaining claims pursuant to the preceding judgment to the Plaintiff, and notified the Defendant of the assignment of claims on July 20, 201.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap's 3 through 8, purport of whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remaining principal of KRW 7,026,069 (=the remaining principal of KRW 2,249,661 and KRW 4,776,408) and the amount of KRW 2,249,661 calculated at the rate of 28% per annum from May 14, 201 to the date of full payment, and the remainder of the Plaintiff’s claim is without merit.

B. Determination on the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant is the Peace Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Pung Bank”).

2) On the other hand, to seek a judgment inconsistent with the existence or non-existence of legal relations determined in the final and conclusive judgment by asserting the method of attack and defense that existed prior to the closing of argument in the previous suit in the subsequent suit on the same subject-matter of lawsuit is not permissible as it goes against the res judicata of the final and conclusive judgment in the previous suit.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2011Da49981 Decided March 27, 2014).