1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendants in Busan District Court 95Kahap14292 and received a judgment in favor of the lower court. After then, the Plaintiff filed an application for determination of the amount of litigation costs under the Busan District Court 99Kahap6945 with respect to the above 95Gahap14292 judgment. On November 1, 1999, the said court decided on November 1, 199 that the amount of litigation costs repaid by the Defendant A shall be KRW 1,682,370 and the amount of litigation costs repaid by the Defendant B shall be KRW 1,010,090, which became final and conclusive as is.

B. In order to interrupt extinctive prescription of the claim for reimbursement based on the above judgment, the Plaintiff filed a new lawsuit to the Busan District Court 2004Gahap7760, and subsequently rendered a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, and thereafter filed an application for confirmation of the amount of litigation costs with the Busan District Court 2004Gahap7760 on May 23, 2005. The above court decided to determine the amount of litigation costs to be repaid by the Defendants as KRW 983,440, respectively, and the decision became final and conclusive as it is.

【Reasons for Recognition】 1-1 and 2-2 of the evidence and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff's request for a new determination of the established litigation costs is groundless, and that the lawsuit in this case is instituted for the interruption of extinctive prescription for the claim for reimbursement of the established litigation costs, and is lawful for the benefit of the protection of rights.

B. The amount of the litigation cost spent as a judgment can be repaid through the procedure for the determination of the litigation cost, and there is no benefit to seek a separate lawsuit (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da68577, May 12, 2000). In order to interrupt extinctive prescription for the right to demand a reimbursement of the litigation cost based on the determination of the amount of the litigation cost already finalized, the procedure for the determination of the litigation cost ought to be followed and there is no benefit to seek a separate lawsuit.

Suwon District Court Decision 2008Na19581 Decided January 22, 2009