1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 227,216,294 and KRW 42,183,561 among them, from August 1, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. According to Gap evidence No. 1-as to the cause of the claim, and the purport of the whole pleadings, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for loans with 2007da2055, Jan. 18, 2008. The above court rendered a judgment that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 90,321,971 won and 42,183,561 won per annum 25% per annum from October 11, 2001 to May 31, 2003, and 200% per annum 36.5% per annum 207.36% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment (hereinafter referred to as "full claim"), 305 won per annum 16.36% per annum 205 x 197.36% per annum 205 x 197.36% per annum 205 x 197.415% per annum.

2. Determination as to the defendant's assertion

A. The gist of the allegation was that the Defendant failed to receive the notice of the date of pleading before the court, and was unable to appear on the date of pleading, and the original copy of the judgment was served by public notice, and therefore,

The plaintiff received the money deposited by the defendant in 1994, and received 32,877,141 won in the auction procedure in 2001.

B. If the original copy of the related legal doctrine was served on the defendant by public notice, the defendant's address is false or insufficient.

Even if the service is valid, the above judgment becomes formally final and conclusive in the way of appeal period, and res judicata becomes effective.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da41560, Feb. 28, 2008). Moreover, a final and conclusive favorable judgment has res judicata effect, and thus, the parties thereto.