beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has concluded an automobile insurance contract with D (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) and the Defendant is the driver of E (hereinafter “Defendant”) and C is the owner of the Defendant’s vehicle.
B. On November 20, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a claim for reimbursement against the Defendant and C (Seoul Central District Court 2007 Ghana327815) with respect to the following cases, and received a favorable judgment from this court on November 20, 2008: “The Defendant and C jointly and severally paid to the Plaintiff KRW 1,428,000 and interest calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from February 1, 2005 to November 11, 2008, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The above judgment was finalized on December 13, 2008.
(2) On August 18, 2004, the case where the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,428,000 of the insurance money to the Plaintiff’s vehicle for an accident, which caused the Plaintiff’s shock of the Plaintiff’s vehicle that was proceeding in the same direction while the Defendant’s vehicle attempted an illegal internship on the road in the area of the west-gu, Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-do on August 18, 2004.
C. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit on September 19, 2018 for the extension of extinctive prescription of the instant claim.
[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of a person has res judicata effect, even in cases where a lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription is filed due to the ten-year lapse of the period of extinctive prescription of a claim based on a final and conclusive judgment, the judgment in the subsequent lawsuit shall not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the person in question. Accordingly, the court in the subsequent lawsuit shall not re-examine whether all the requirements to assert the established right are satisfied.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2018Da22008, Jul. 19, 2018). (B)
In light of the above legal principles, the instant case is intended.