1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,975,470 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from December 27, 2006 to September 29, 2010, and the following.

1. Indication of claims: To be as specified in attached Form 1;

2. Grounds: Judgment without holding any pleadings (Article 208 (3) 1 of the Civil Procedure Act);

3. The part of the claim for damages for delay, which partially dismissed, asserts that the rate of damages for delay shall apply 20% per annum from September 30, 2010 to the date of full payment.

However, as a lawsuit brought for the interruption of extinctive prescription of a final and conclusive payment order, there is no res judicata even if the payment order has become final and conclusive (in the case of a lawsuit brought for the interruption of extinctive prescription of a final and conclusive judgment, the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “

) Even if the interest rate for delay under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is changed, the validity of the judgment in favor of the plaintiff does not vary, and it does not change the validity of the judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and it does not mean that the amount different from the judgment in favor of the plaintiff can be recognized as the plaintiff's claim amount by applying the interest rate under the revised Civil Procedure Promotion Act, unlike the judgment in favor of the previous case (see Supreme Court Decision 2019Da215272, Aug. 29, 2019). However, since the payment order has no res judicata effect on the payment order, the above legal principle cannot be applied since there is no res judicata effect on the payment order, since the provision on the statutory interest rate under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is revised, and the delay interest rate under the Act on Civil Procedure is 15% per annum from October 1, 2015