1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

1. Basic facts

A. On December 15, 2004, at the lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant with the Seoul Southern District Court, the judgment in favor of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “the judgment in this case”) that “the Defendant paid the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 14,192,00 and the amount of KRW 20% per annum to the Plaintiff from November 5, 2004 to the date of full payment” was rendered, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. The Defendant filed for bankruptcy and exemption with the District Court in 2009, and was declared bankrupt on November 12, 2009 (2009Hadan6523), and was granted immunity on January 25, 2010 (2009Da6517), and the above immunity immunity became final and conclusive on February 10, 2010.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In regard to the Plaintiff’s assertion that the claim of this case against the Defendant was filed in order to prevent the extinction of the ten-year prescription period, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant was declared bankrupt and exempted from immunity.

On the other hand, notwithstanding the res judicata effect of a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, there is a benefit in the lawsuit filed for the interruption of prescription against the plaintiff's assertion. However, such a legal principle is valid only when the interruption of prescription causes a benefit in maintaining the claim as it is, and it is not possible to allow the benefit in the lawsuit if there is no benefit in the lawsuit (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da26979, Feb. 9, 2001). According to the above facts, according to the above facts, the defendant is exempted from the responsibility for all of the claims included in the judgment amount under the main sentence of Article 566 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, so the plaintiff becomes unable to seek the performance of the above obligation or enforce it by lawsuit.

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the performance of the instant judgment amount is unlawful as there is no benefit of lawsuit.

B. As to this, the Plaintiff is the Plaintiff.