1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 23, 2005, the Seoul High Court found the Defendant and the co-defendant C, D, E, and F of the first instance trial jointly with the Plaintiff and issued a compensation order stating that “The Defendant and the co-defendant C, D, E, and F shall pay KRW 48 million to each Plaintiff, respectively, in the amount of KRW 10 million,00,000,000,000,000 which was deposited on June 2, 200, deducted from the total of KRW 98,000,000,000 which was deposited on June 2, 200, deducted from the total of KRW 98,00,000,000 which was deposited on June 2, 200.”

(Seoul High Court 2004 early 111, hereinafter "the compensation order of this case"). (b)

On September 23, 2005, the main case of the instant compensation order, Defendant C, D, E, and F, the co-defendants of the first instance court, appealed both against the conviction of the appellate court (Seoul High Court 2003No2996) on September 23, 2005, and the Supreme Court sentenced the dismissal of the appeal on February 8, 2007.

(Supreme Court Decision 2005Do7909). [Grounds for recognition] A; entry of evidence No. 1; substantial fact in this court; the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the instant lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff on January 16, 2017 for the extension of the prescription period for the instant compensation order is lawful, and the Defendant and the co-defendant C, D, E, and F of the first instance trial are jointly obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 48 million for damages.

B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion 1) The order for compensation received by the Plaintiff is not a judgment based on each subparagraph of Article 165 of the Civil Act, but is not recognized as res judicata, so the extinctive prescription is not extended to 10 years. As such, three years have passed since the prescription period was 3 years, and since the instant order for compensation was filed on January 16, 2017, when 10 years have passed since September 30, 2005 when the instant order for compensation became final and conclusive, the Plaintiff’s claim has already expired.

B. The remainder, excluding KRW 120,000,000,000, which was unfairly deducted by the Plaintiff with G, is a high rate of commission by deceiving the Defendant, and if according to the original agreement, the remainder, excluding KRW 338,000,000,000, is all the Defendant.