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. The parties' assertion

A. On May 8, 2003, the Plaintiff agreed to separately receive value-added tax on monthly rent when leasing C304 and 305 (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) to the Defendant. The value-added tax on monthly rent from May 10, 2003 to March 20, 2009, is KRW 9220,000,000, and the Defendant and the Defendant are obligated to pay value-added tax on monthly rent from May 10, 2003 to March 20, respectively.

B. The Plaintiff’s claim of this case by the Defendant is identical to that of the Changwon District Court 2012Da15630 decided by the judgment, and thus, is contrary to res judicata.

2. When a judgment becomes final and conclusive in a civil lawsuit, the existence or non-existence of the claim becomes final and conclusive, and where a party who lost in the prior suit claims against the party to the prior suit against the party to the prior suit in conflict with the res judicata of the prior suit, the court shall not make any judgment inconsistent with the res judicata of the prior suit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da18155, Jun. 9, 2000). According to the following: (a) Then, the court shall not make any judgment contrary to the res judicata of the prior suit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 98Da18155, May 21, 2012). According to the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff applied for the payment order to the Changwon District Court, which entered into an agreement against the defendant to pay KRW 922,200,000 from May 10, 2003 to March 20, which entered into the said order of payment, the plaintiff’s appeal.