1. The judgment of the first instance court, including a claim reduced by this court, shall be modified as follows:

In the lawsuit of this case.

1. The plaintiff sought positive damages and consolation money from tort against the defendant. The court of first instance accepted part of the claim for consolation money and dismissed the remainder of the claim.

Since only the defendant appealed against this, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim of consolation money which is accepted by the first instance court.

2. Judgment on the defendant's main defense

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on the same subject matter of lawsuit as the instant lawsuit, and the judgment in favor of the Plaintiff became final and conclusive, is unlawful as it goes against the res judicata of the said judgment.

The part seeking the payment of consolation money on the ground of insult cannot be seen as a separate cause of claim and a separate statement in the previous lawsuit.

B. Determination 1) Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of the Plaintiff has res judicata effect, in a case where the said party files a lawsuit against the other party to the suit identical to the previous suit in favor of the final and conclusive judgment, the subsequent suit is unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Da23066, Nov. 14, 2017) (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Da23066, Nov. 14, 2017). In full view of the following: (a) the following: (b) the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant on Nov. 2, 2017, which was prior to the instant lawsuit, seeking damages due to rape, etc., which is part of the cause of the instant claim (Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017Da45026, Nov. 8, 2018; and (c) the Defendant did not file a final and conclusive appeal against the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the part of the Plaintiff’s claim for consolation money based on insult among the lawsuits of this case.