1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 1,870,000 and its amount from September 24, 2008.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Korea Phone Board Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Phone Board”) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of advertising fees under the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2008Gada119412, as it did not receive advertising fees even after receiving a request for advertising services from the Defendant.

(hereinafter referred to as “prior action”). (b)

On September 26, 2008, the Seoul Western District Court rendered a ruling that "the defendant shall pay to the non-party company the amount of KRW 1,870,000 and the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 20% per annum from September 24, 2008 to the date of full payment." The above ruling became final and conclusive on November 14, 2008.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant claim”) C.

On December 3, 2014, Nonparty Company transferred the instant claim to the Plaintiff. On April 27, 2015, Nonparty Company sent to the Defendant a written notice containing the intent of the transfer of claim by content-certified mail.

The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit to extend the prescription period of the instant claim.

【Reasons for Recognition】 1 through 3, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. In a case where a party who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the other party to a lawsuit files a lawsuit identical to the previous suit in favor of the other party to the lawsuit against the other party to the lawsuit, the subsequent suit is unlawful 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 the claim based on the final and conclusive judgment has expired, the benefit of the lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription can be acknowledged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006). The existence of benefit in the lawsuit should be determined at the time of the closing of argument in the fact-finding court.

In this case, the fact that a judgment has become final and conclusive in accordance with the prior suit regarding the claim of this case by the Health Unit is as seen earlier, but the prior suit is prior suit.