beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
Reasons
1. At around 15:30 on August 17, 2003, the Defendant: (a) driven a vehicle owned by G at the intersection in front of the Gosong-gun, Gosong-gun, Gosong-gun, Gosong-gun, Gosong, Gosong-gun, the Defendant: (b) concealed the Plaintiff’s vehicle.
(B) In the following, the Plaintiff suffered from the injury of light scopical salt, etc. due to the instant traffic accident, and the Plaintiff’s driver’s vehicle was damaged.
Accordingly, the designated parties D, the designated parties E and F (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiffs, etc.”) who were the Plaintiff’s husband, the Plaintiff’s children, and the designated parties E and F (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiffs, etc.”) filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and G against the Defendant for compensation for damages due to the instant traffic accident under the Jeonju District Court’s branch court’s 2005Kadan1740, Jun. 23, 2006. The judgment became final and conclusive on July 19, 2006.
(F) Under the following, the Defendant and G jointly pay to the Plaintiff KRW 42,729,740, and KRW 6,000,000, KRW 3,000, and KRW 3,000 to the Appointor E and F respectively, as well as 5% per annum from August 18, 2003 to June 20, 206, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.
The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription of claims based on the final judgment of the instant case.
[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the factual relations prior to the judgment on the cause of the claim, the lawsuit of this case is deemed to have benefit in the lawsuit as a lawsuit for the interruption of extinctive prescription of the claim based on the final judgment of this case, and thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff, etc. money
B. The judgment of the defendant on the defendant's assertion was made after the defendant was admitted to the investigation agency due to the traffic accident in this case and agreed not to impose civil and criminal liability on the plaintiff. Thus, the plaintiff et al. is against the defendant as the lawsuit in this case.