1. The Defendants are jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff for 30,000,000 won and 5% per annum from March 1, 1997 to September 27, 2005.

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence No. 1 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff lent KRW 30,000,000 to defendant B on January 31, 1997, and the defendant C jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan debt of defendant B and filed a loan lawsuit against the defendants in Busan District Court 2005Kadan5257. In the above lawsuit, it can be acknowledged that the judgment ordering the defendants to jointly and severally pay the money as stated in Paragraph (1) of this Article was sentenced on October 12, 2005 and confirmed on November 6, 2015.

According to the above facts, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the money set forth in Paragraph (1) of this Article to the Plaintiff upon the Plaintiff’s request for the interruption of extinctive prescription of claims based on

2. As to the determination of Defendant C’s assertion, Defendant C did not have any joint and several liability for the above loan debt, and the above loan lawsuit was initiated by service by public notice, and thus, Defendant C cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim.

Even in cases where a new suit is allowed based on the same subject matter as a final and conclusive judgment that has become final and conclusive exceptionally due to special circumstances, such as a case to be examined and interruption of prescription, the judgment of the new suit does not conflict with the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit. As such, the court of the subsequent suit cannot re-examine whether the requirements for claiming the established right have been satisfied. In order for the Defendant to dispute the legal relationship of the previous suit in the subsequent suit, first of all, the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit should be extinguished by filing a lawful subsequent appeal against the final and conclusive judgment in favor of the previous suit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da11340, Apr. 11, 2013). In this case, there is no evidence to deem that the res judicata effect of the said final and conclusive judgment has expired due to lawful completion of subsequent appeal, etc.