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

2. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be individually counted.

1. The scope of the judgment in this Court claimed against the Defendant for the payment of each claim that the Plaintiff acquired from Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. and Solomon Savings Bank (hereinafter “ Solomon Savings Bank”). The court of the first instance accepted the claim that the Plaintiff acquired from Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. and dismissed the part of the claim that the Plaintiff acquired from Solomon Savings Bank.

Since only the plaintiff appeals against this, the subject of this Court's adjudication is limited to the part against the plaintiff, i.e., the claim against the Solomon Savings Bank.

2. To examine ex officio whether the action against a claim that the Solomon Savings Bank has taken over is legitimate;

Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of a person who has received a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in a case where the said person files a lawsuit against the other party to the previous suit against the same claim as that of the final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party to the previous suit, the subsequent suit shall be deemed unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights. However, in exceptional cases where it is obvious that the ten-year lapse period, which is the period of extinctive prescription of the claim based on the final and conclusive judgment, has expired, there is a benefit in the lawsuit for interruption of prescription (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006). Since the final and conclusive judgment has its effect not only for the party, but also for the successor after the closure

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in the statements in Gap 3, 4, and Gap 1, 7-2, Solomon Savings Bank shall file a lawsuit against the defendant against the defendant as Seoul Central District Court 2008Gaso260261 and rendered a judgment that "the defendant shall pay the plaintiff 15,298,763 won and 6,77,778 won among them with 15,298,763 won and 25% interest per annum from June 6, 2008 to the day of full payment" and confirmed on December 17, 2008, and the plaintiff shall solomon bank on April 10, 2009.