The plaintiff is based on the real estate lease contract dated May 29, 2008 between the plaintiff and the defendant.

1. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking confirmation of the existence of the obligation under the instant lease agreement, and concluded a lease agreement between the Defendant and the Defendant’s senior F, not the Defendant, by setting the lease deposit amount of KRW 25 million. As such, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the existence of the obligation under the instant lease agreement, as stated in the instant claim.

On June 29, 2016, this court concluded the pleading, and on August 3, 2016, rendered a ruling that “the part exceeding KRW 25 million among the Plaintiff’s obligation to refund the lease deposit to the Defendant under the instant lease agreement does not exist and the remainder of the claim is dismissed” (hereinafter “final judgment in a prior suit”), and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(C) On February 2, 201, we examine whether the plaintiff's claim ex officio conflicts with res judicata.

A. Res judicata of a final and conclusive judgment is limited to a judgment on the existence of legal relations asserted as a subject matter of a lawsuit, and thus, the same parties cannot be allowed to file a subsequent suit for the same subject matter of a lawsuit between themselves, contrary to res judicata of the final and conclusive judgment in the previous suit.

In addition, in a subsequent suit as to the same subject matter of lawsuit, seeking a judgment inconsistent with the existence or absence of the legal relationship determined in the final and conclusive judgment by asserting the means of offence and defense that existed prior to the closing of argument in the fact-finding court is contrary to the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment in the previous suit, and further, whether the parties did not know the means of offence and defense in the previous suit and

(See Supreme Court Decision 2011Da49981 Decided March 27, 2014). B.

The claim of this case and the parties to the previous suit and the subject matter of lawsuit are identical, and the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment in the previous suit is to be applied to the claim of this case, unless there exist grounds newly arising after the closing of arguments at the fact-finding court on June 29,