1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A Co., Ltd shall pay 35,539,469 won;

B. Defendant C shall have the network D on January 11, 2014.

1. The facts following the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged in Gap evidence No. 1 by integrating the whole purport of the pleadings.

On October 31, 2005, the Plaintiff was sentenced to a ruling ordering D and Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) to jointly and severally pay KRW 35,539,469 to the Plaintiff. The above ruling became final and conclusive around that time.

B. After that, D died on January 11, 2014, E, a child of his/her heir, and E, a child of his/her heir, renounced his/her inheritance under the Daejeon Family Court’s Decision 2014-Ma174, 2014-Ma174, and the Defendant, a birth of D, was qualified for inheritance under the same court’s Decision 2016-Ma918.

C. On the other hand, on October 8, 2015, the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the claim established by the above judgment.

2. Determination

A. 1) Claim against the Defendant Company is identical to the above recognized facts. 2) Decision by service based on the basis of recognition (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

B. According to the facts of the above recognition of the claim against the defendant C, the defendant C is jointly and severally liable with the defendant company to pay KRW 35,539,469 to the extent of the property inherited from the network D, as the plaintiff seeks.

3. The plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and all of them are accepted.