1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

ex officio, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

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 party who received the final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party files a lawsuit again against the other party to the previous judgment in favor of one party to the previous suit, the subsequent suit shall be deemed unlawful as there is no benefit of protection of rights. However, in exceptional cases, where it is obvious that the ten-year period of ex

(1) In light of the above legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the non-repaid claim and damages for delay, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Meu1761, Nov. 10, 1987; 2005Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006; 2006Da74764, Apr. 14, 2006). The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the non-repaid claim and damages for delay, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 200Da74764, Jun. 21, 2001; 2008Da74764, Jun. 21, 2001).

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is filed again against the Defendants, who are the other party to the lawsuit of this case, and there is no benefit in the protection of rights, and ten years have passed since the judgment became final and conclusive, and the extinctive prescription of the claim based on the final and conclusive judgment has already been expired, and thus, the benefit as a lawsuit for interruption of prescription cannot be recognized.

Ultimately, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.