1. The defendant's KRW 192,00,000 for the plaintiff and 25% per annum from October 24, 1996 to July 27, 2007.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. According to the evidence Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant with Seoul Southern District Court 96Gahap17098, Feb. 20, 1997, and sentenced the above court to "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 192,00,000 won and interest rate of 25% per annum from October 24, 1996 to the day of full payment." The above judgment becomes final and conclusive on March 20, 1997; the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant for the extension of the ten-year prescription period from the above judgment to the expiration of the ten-year prescription period, and the judgment of this court shall be recognized as having been paid the plaintiff 192,00,000 won and interest rate of 205% per annum from July 27, 2007 to the day of full payment."

B. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 192,00,000 won with 25% per annum from October 24, 1996 to July 27, 2007; 20% per annum from the next day to November 24, 2017, which is the date of this sentencing; and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff received KRW 150 million from the Plaintiff and immediately remitted the KRW 100 million among them to C, and the Defendant used KRW 50 million for the Defendant’s expense, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim is unreasonable.

B. The grounds alleged by the Defendant are all deemed to have occurred prior to the date of closing of argument in the previous lawsuit and could have been asserted in the previous lawsuit. Thus, the allegation in the instant lawsuit is not permissible against the res judicata effect of the final and conclusive judgment in the previous lawsuit, and the said recognition is reversed only by the statement in the evidence No. 1.