1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 33,50,000 as well as 5% per annum from October 15, 1994 to April 13, 1995, and on April 14, 1995.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking payment of KRW 33,50,000,00,000, out of the loan amount of KRW 23,500,000 as of May 17, 1994 and the total amount of KRW 15,50,000 as of May 17, 1994, deducting the amount of KRW 5,00,000, which the Defendant transferred to the Plaintiff in lieu of repayment of the above loan obligation, from among the loan amount of KRW 38,50,000,000, which was owned by the Daegu District Court 94Gahap21294.

On April 13, 1995, the above court sentenced the plaintiff to the effect that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 33,500,000 won with 5% interest per annum from October 15, 1994 to April 13, 1995 and 25% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment (hereinafter "the preceding judgment of this case")."

Accordingly, the defendant appealed from Daegu High Court 95Na2402, but the above court rendered a judgment dismissing the defendant's appeal on April 26, 1996.

Therefore, the defendant appealed to the Supreme Court Decision 96Da20932, but the Supreme Court rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on July 2, 1996, and the above judgment became final and conclusive.

Before filing the said loan lawsuit, the Plaintiff filed an application for provisional attachment on the share of 638/1436 square meters in the Gu-U.S., Daegu District Court Decision 94Kahap277, Daegu District Court, Kimcheon-do, 1980 square meters in the amount of 139/599 square meters in the amount of 1980 square meters in Gu-si, Si, Gu-si, and Gu-si D 495 square meters in the amount of 495 square meters in the amount of 195 square meters in order

Meanwhile, the Defendant applied for the revocation of the provisional attachment order as the Daegu District Court Kimcheon Branch 2016Kahap30, but the said court rendered a decision to dismiss the provisional attachment on April 6, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

B. According to the above facts of recognition, in this case, a loan based on the established prior ruling of this case and damages for delay thereof have been filed for the extension of the prescription period, the defendant, except in extenuating circumstances.