1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

The plaintiff claims as stated in the grounds for the claim, and is seeking the payment of the acquisition money to the defendant.

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

Inasmuch as a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, in cases where the party against whom a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party in favor of one party in a lawsuit again files a claim identical to the previous suit in favor of the other party in the previous suit, barring any special circumstance, the subsequent suit is unlawful as there is no benefit in the protection of rights (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Da24349, Jan. 17, 2019). This legal doctrine

According to the evidence evidence No. 1, C Co., Ltd., on December 1, 2017, acknowledged that it received a payment order identical to the purport of the instant claim against the Defendant in the case of the claim for reimbursement amount of the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017 tea51026, and the Plaintiff is the assignee of the claim for reimbursement for which the above payment order became final and conclusive, and thus, constitutes a successor, and thus is entitled to compulsory execution by accepting the execution clause succeeded to the Defendant, and the above claim has an excessive ten-year extinctive prescription period, counting from the date the above claim

The lawsuit of this case cannot be deemed to have become practically difficult to enforce compulsory execution based on the above payment order. Thus, there is no benefit in protecting the rights.

Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and dismissed, and it is so decided as per Disposition.