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 in favor of one party has res judicata effect, the subsequent suit is unlawful in principle as there is no benefit in the protection of rights. However, in exceptional cases where it is obvious that the ten-year period of extinctive prescription of a claim based on a final and conclusive judgment has expired, there is benefit in the lawsuit for interruption of prescription.

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants on April 14, 2006 with the Government Branch of Seoul District Court 2003Gahap3673, and won the entire loan on August 16, 2003. Since the above judgment became final and conclusive on September 13, 2003, in principle, there is no benefit in seeking a favorable judgment on the same claim, and the instant lawsuit does not constitute a benefit in protecting the right to seek a new favorable judgment on September 13, 2003, which is 10 years from September 13, 2003 after the said judgment became final and conclusive, and the extinctive prescription period of ten years has expired since it was clearly stated in the record that the application for payment order was filed on December 24, 2014, which is 10 years after the said judgment became final and conclusive, and thus, it does not constitute an exception in claiming for the protection of the right to claim a new extinctive prescription period for interruption of prescription.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is dismissed as it is unlawful because there is no benefit of protection of rights.