1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. As to the legitimacy of the lawsuit, it shall be considered.

Since a final and conclusive judgment in favor of one party has res judicata effect, the parties can not file a new suit based on the same subject matter as the final and conclusive judgment in principle, but in exceptional cases where there are special circumstances such as interruption of prescription, a new suit shall be allowed.

In the case of this case, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit on March 23, 1998 on the ground that the defendant had jointly and severally guaranteed a loan obligation of KRW 60,000,000 in the middle-term housing loan obligation of KRW 1,000,000, which was judged in favor of the defendant on February 1, 2005, but filed a lawsuit again for the interruption of extinctive prescription

However, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1-5 and No. 1-1, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant against the Seoul Central District Court 2004Kadan9002 and won a favorable judgment on February 1, 2005, and the defendant appealed against this judgment and appealed against the defendant to pay the plaintiff the amount of KRW 3 million until July 31, 2007. The above decision can be recognized as having become final and conclusive on July 3, 2007. According to the above facts, the plaintiff's re-instigation of the lawsuit of this case based on the same subject-matter of lawsuit is illegitimate.

I would like to say.

(The period of extinctive prescription remains considerably, and there is no need for the interruption of extinctive prescription).2. Conclusion rejection of the suit