1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff asserts as the cause of the claim of this case as shown in the attached Form. The plaintiff's judgment on the legitimacy of the lawsuit of this case is examined.

Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in a case where the other party in the previous suit files a lawsuit against the other party in favor of one party in 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 period of extinctive prescription of the claim based on the final and conclusive judgment has expired, there is benefit

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006). A final and conclusive judgment, other than the parties, also becomes effective against a successor subsequent to the closure of pleadings (see, e.g., Article 218(1) of the Civil Procedure Act). A transferee of a pecuniary claim of a judgment ordering monetary payment after the closure of pleadings constitutes the

In full view of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 and the fact-finding results with respect to Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd. of this court (hereinafter "Tsung Life Insurance"), the first creditor of the claim of this case filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the same subject matter as the claim of this case and the judgment in favor of the defendant on July 20, 2004 (hereinafter "the judgment of this case"). On August 5, 2004, the judgment of this case became final and conclusive. After the defendant filed a debt adjustment application with the Credit Counseling Board around September 19, 201, and accordingly, it can be recognized that the above support became void on the grounds that the first creditor of the claim of this case was unpaid around November 16, 201.

According to the above facts, the extinctive prescription of the claim based on the judgment of this case is to grant the suspension of the obligation by preparing the above debt settlement plan against the defendant.