beta
Text
1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;
2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The Plaintiff’s asserted Korea Asset Management Corporation filed a lawsuit against the Defendant in March 2012 as Seoul Western District Court Decision 2012Da351879, and the said court rendered a judgment on September 6, 2012 that “the Defendant shall pay the Korea Asset Management Corporation KRW 14,832,703 and interest calculated at the rate of 18% per annum from March 1, 2012 to the date of full payment” with respect to KRW 4,230,450 and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 3, 2012.
On August 28, 2012, the Korea Asset Management Corporation transferred the claim for the amount of money that became final and conclusive by the said judgment to the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff Company Before the change: Tyman Loan Company) and notified the Defendant thereof.
As of December 30, 2014, the claim for the amount of the above transfer was 17,086,432 won including the principal amount of KRW 4,230,450 and interest KRW 12,85,982.
2. The lawsuit shall be deemed lawful ex officio.
Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the winning party has res judicata effect, the party who won the lawsuit does not have a benefit to protect the rights of the new suit based on the same subject matter as the final and conclusive judgment. However, in exceptional cases where there are special circumstances, such as the need for the interruption of extinctive prescription, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da61557, Oct. 28, 2010). Considering that the instant case is a health unit and the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff’s transferee of the claim established by the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2012Da351879, Sept. 6, 2012, the res judicata effect of the said judgment is effective against the Plaintiff. The claim for the performance of the obligation to pay the transferred money that the Plaintiff seeks by the instant lawsuit constitutes a new suit based on the same subject matter as the final and conclusive judgment. Since the period of extinctive prescription (10 years from the date of final and conclusive judgment: Articles 165(1) and 178(2) of the Civil Act) does not constitute an inevitable benefit of the instant lawsuit.
3. As such, the instant lawsuit is brought.