1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 23, 2002, the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 3 million from the National Bank of Korea (hereinafter “National Bank”) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “National Bank”).

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant loan”), which the Plaintiff received from the Plaintiff, B.

On April 23, 2010, the National Bank filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking the payment of the balance of the instant loan with the Busan District Court 2010 Ghana128603, and was sentenced to a judgment in favor of the Plaintiff on July 27, 2010, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

(hereinafter referred to as “the final and conclusive judgment of the previous suit of this case”) C.

On June 21, 2013, the National Card Co., Ltd. established by dividing it from the National Bank on March 2, 2011, transferred the instant loans to the Defendant, and thereafter notified the Plaintiff of the transfer of the said loans.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence No. 3, Eul evidence No. 4-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff of the claim of this case seeks confirmation of the non-existence of the obligation based on the final judgment of the previous suit of this case by the lawsuit of this case, and for this reason, it is apparent that the obligation of this case was already extinguished by prescription.

3. On the other hand, the determination of res judicata does not allow the filing of a subsequent suit identical to the subject matter of a prior suit by asserting the method of attack and defense that existed prior to the closing of argument in the prior suit that has res judicata effect. At the same time, even if the subject matter of a prior suit is not the same as the subject matter of a prior suit, if the determination of the subject matter of a prior suit is a prior question in the prior suit or contradictory relation, it does not allow the subsequent suit to assert the method of attack and defense that existed prior to the closing of argument in the prior suit and make a claim

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da47361, Dec. 27, 2002, etc.). The method of attack that existed prior to the closing of argument in the previous suit is, as it is, prior to the closing of argument in the previous suit.