1. Compulsory execution against the plaintiffs by the defendant based on the Busan District Court Decision 2009Ga Office 340841 decided March 22, 2010.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are married couple.

B. The defendant filed a lawsuit against the plaintiffs as Busan District Court Decision 2009Ga Office 340841, and the above court rendered a judgment on March 22, 2010 that "the plaintiffs shall pay 30% per annum from August 13, 1999 to November 25, 2009 and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment" to the defendant, and the above judgment (hereinafter "prior judgment") became final and conclusive on April 15, 2010.

(c)

On May 12, 2020, the Plaintiffs agreed with the Defendant to reduce the principal and interest of the preceding judgment and set forth KRW 9,000,000 (hereinafter “instant agreement”). On the same day, the Plaintiffs paid KRW 3,000,000 out of the instant agreement to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 5 evidence, Eul 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs asserted that compulsory execution based on the preceding judgment should be denied because the claim of the preceding judgment has expired ten years after the date when the judgment became final and conclusive, and therefore, it is recognized that the preceding judgment became final and conclusive on April 15, 2010. On the other hand, on the other hand, the plaintiffs paid KRW 3,00,000 to the defendant on May 12, 2020 after the lapse of ten years from the date when the above judgment became final and conclusive, as seen earlier, according to the agreement in this case, the plaintiffs renounced the benefit of the extinction of the statute of limitations on the claim of the preceding judgment. Accordingly, the plaintiffs renounced the benefit of the extinction of the statute of limitations on the claim of the preceding judgment.

It is reasonable to view it.

Therefore, the defendant's argument pointing this out is with merit, and the plaintiffs' primary argument is without merit.

3. Reviewing the determination of the Plaintiffs’ preliminary assertion, based on the facts found earlier, the amount of the preceding judgment was reduced to KRW 9,000,000 according to the instant agreement between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, and the Plaintiffs were reduced to KRW 3,00,000 out of the said amount.