1. The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the lawsuit corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed;

2...

The Plaintiff asserts that on June 21, 2013, the Defendant is liable to pay the credit card fee of KRW 794,660 to the Defendant of the new credit card company, as well as its delayed payment damages claims, and the assignment of claims was notified.

(3) The court below's decision on September 29, 2010 (hereinafter "the final judgment of this case") and the court below's decision on September 29, 2010 (hereinafter "the final judgment of this case"), which affected the conclusion of the judgment of this case, can be acknowledged that the judgment of this case became final and conclusive around that time. The court below's decision on September 29, 2010 (hereinafter "the final judgment of this case") is justified.

Therefore, the Plaintiff is the assignee of the claim after the closing of argument in the final and conclusive judgment of this case and thus there is no benefit to file a separate lawsuit.

Furthermore, since the period of extinctive prescription is ten years for a claim established by a judgment (Article 165(1) of the Civil Act), the need to file a lawsuit for the extension of the prescription is difficult, since the period of extinctive prescription is ten years (Article 165(1) of the Civil Act), on December 18, 2013, which was at the time when the Plaintiff applied for the instant payment order with respect to the claim that the Plaintiff acquired, only three

Ultimately, the Plaintiff’s above claim for the amount of money taken over is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit, and thus, the lawsuit corresponding to that part should be dismissed

The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the court of first instance, which differs from this conclusion, shall be revoked, and the lawsuit on this part shall be dismissed.