1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. On September 4, 2001, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the implementation of the procedure for changing the name of the founder of a school as Daegu District Court 2000Gahap2447, and rendered a favorable judgment against the Plaintiff that “the Defendant shall implement the procedure for changing the name of the installer of the D High School, a lifelong educational establishment in Daegu-gu, to the Defendant from the Defendant to the Plaintiff” (hereinafter “instant final judgment”), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 26, 2001.

[Ground of recognition] The entry of Gap evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole argument

2. Judgment on the lawfulness of the lawsuit

A. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for the extension of extinctive prescription of the claim established by the final judgment of the instant case.

B. In principle, the re-instigation of a lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription of a claim established by a mistake or judgment shall have interests in the lawsuit notwithstanding the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment. However, such legal doctrine is reasonable only when the interruption of extinctive prescription results in the practical benefit of maintaining the claim as it is. If there is no practical benefit to maintain it as it is, then the re-instigation of a lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da26979 delivered on February 9, 2001). C.

Since an application to change the installer of a school-type lifelong educational establishment has the substance of applying for the registration of a school-type lifelong educational establishment and the designation of a school-type lifelong educational establishment for a new installer substituted for the previous installer, an administrative agency shall meet the requirements prescribed by the current lifelong education law to accept an application for change of the installer of a school-type lifelong educational establishment (see Supreme Court Decision 2001Du9929, Apr. 11, 2003). Article 28(5) of the current Lifelong Education Act provides that “the person who establishes a school-type lifelong educational establishment shall be an incorporated foundation under the Private School Act for the establishment and operation of a school-type or a public-service corporation.”