beta
Text
1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff respectively lent KRW 20 million to the Defendant on September 17, 2013, KRW 30 million on October 7, 2013, KRW 30 million on October 7, 2013, and KRW 30 million on December 23, 2013.
(hereinafter “each of the instant loans”). (b)
The guaranteed debt case (Ulsan District Court 2015Gahap23426) brought by the Plaintiff against the Defendant (Ulsan District Court 2015Gahap23426) was judged in favor of the lower court equivalent to 250 million won and damages for delay thereof. The conciliation was concluded including each of the instant loans in the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2016Na54988), which was conducted by the Defendant’s appeal (hereinafter “instant conciliation”), and the main contents are as follows.
(1) The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 290 million in installments.
(2) If the Defendant fails to comply with the payment date, the Defendant shall lose the benefit of time and shall pay 330 million won and delay damages therefor.
[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant filed the instant lawsuit in order to receive KRW 80 million for each of the loans of this case, with the Defendant’s failure to pay the amount set forth in the instant conciliation.
B. Conciliations have the same effect as a settlement in the court, and a settlement in the court has the same effect as a final and conclusive judgment and has the same effect as a settlement in the court, so if settlement is made, the relationship of rights and obligations based on the previous legal relationship is extinguished. Thus, if settlement is made between the parties, the relationship of rights and obligations based on the previous legal relationship is extinguished, and a new relationship of rights and obligations
(Supreme Court Decision 2005Da32814, 32821 Decided June 29, 2006). C.
The conciliation of this case is established including each loan of this case, and the lawsuit of this case seeking the payment of each loan of this case is in conflict with the res judicata effect of the conciliation of this case which has the same effect as the final and conclusive judgment.